Bits Bucket for November 30, 2012
Post off-topic ideas, links, and Craigslist finds here. And check out Chomp, Chomp, Chomp by a regular poster!
The Housing Bubble
Examining the home price boom and its effect on owners, lenders, regulators, realtors and the economy as a whole.
About Me
Name:Ben Jones
Location:Northern Arizona, United States
To donate by mail, or to otherwise contact this blogger, please send emails to: thehousingbubble@gmail.com
PayPal is a secure online payment method which accepts ALL major credit cards.
Links
-
January 2025 M T W T F S S « Sep 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Photo Submission: hbbphotos@gmail.com
View the HBB Photo Gallery *updated 4/13/2008
G.O.P. Balks at White House Plan on Fiscal Crisis
By JONATHAN WEISMAN
Published: November 29, 2012
WASHINGTON — Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner presented the House speaker, John A. Boehner, a detailed proposal on Thursday to avert the year-end fiscal crisis with $1.6 trillion in tax increases over 10 years, $50 billion in immediate stimulus spending, home mortgage refinancing and a permanent end to Congressional control over statutory borrowing limits.
The proposal, loaded with Democratic priorities and short on detailed spending cuts, met strong Republican resistance. In exchange for locking in the $1.6 trillion in added revenues, President Obama embraced the goal of finding $400 billion in savings from Medicare and other social programs to be worked out next year, with no guarantees.
He did propose some upfront cuts in programs like farm price supports, but did not specify an amount or any details. And senior Republican aides familiar with the offer said those initial spending cuts might be outweighed by spending increases, including at least $50 billion in infrastructure spending, mortgage relief, an extension of unemployment insurance and a deferral of automatic cuts to physician reimbursements under Medicare.
“The Democrats have yet to get serious about real spending cuts,” Mr. Boehner said after the meeting. “No substantive progress has been made in the talks between the White House and the House over the last two weeks.”
…
“1.6 trillion in tax increases over ten years” = kick the can
Coupled with …
“$50 billion in immediate stimulus spending”
This is the sort of thinking that got us here.
But what we see here is obvious. The President is incapable of acting like an adult and making any serious “budget” proposals. As always, he “talks” about a “balanced” approach, and says that Cuts are on the table. He criticized Romney for not providing sufficient details with his proposed cuts.
Now, the Democrats provide NONE. It’s the Hank Paulsen plan. Give me 1.6 Trillion MORE, over the already bloated budget and get out of the way and we will “fix” America.
It’s a purely political move. The Democrats are wanting to make the Republicans put all the CUTS on the table, thereby being able to point the finger (as always) at the Republicans being the ones who want to “take away” your goodies.
It’s also not dealing in good faith. It’s why we had such a difficult time dealing with the soviets.
The Republicans should hold Obama to his word, that he would REDUCE the deficit. Where are the reductions?
Oh, just give us the increase, and then we can talk about any cuts, later. Just like the first Amnesty Bill the Republicans fell for: Make these people “legal” and we’ll work together to fix the border problem so this doesn’t happen again> NOT.
All of you supporters of Obama should feel disappointed that he has no intention of solving any fiscal problems. He wants to be the Candyman and pass out goodies. Any fool can do that. Where’s the budget priorities?? There are none, just payoffs to political supporters.
Stalin would be proud.
Surely you are aware of the type of “goodies” that Stalin passed out. In good faith, of course.
We read all three volumes of “The Gulag Archipelago” (yes, all 2,000+ pages) and after our exhaustive research of articles linked from the Drudge Report, can now conclude that that is exactly what Obama plans for USA in the next four years
You have to pass it to see what’s in it!
“The first amnesty bill that the Republicans fell for?”
You mean the one introduced by a republican, and approved by republicans under a republican president?
That one?
Yeah that one, just because a few RINO’s support illegal immigration does not make it right for our country. That is unless you have a desire to see the United States become as poor as Bangladesh.
Are they RINOs? Seems like they control the party.
There lies the problem. They want cheap labor even at the expense of votes and our way of life. Call them whatever you want.
not really, tax cuts on the rich and unpaid wars and medicare got us here.
trickle down does not work. Corp profits are at all time highs, yet unemployment is high in the USA.
“Fiscal Cliff” = a totally unforseen event.
(sarc)
it’s all bush’s fault…for not being able to make the tax cuts permanent.
or Bush’s fault for increasing the deficit more the 100%
those neo’s can spend!!!
Massive cuts to war machine: “not serious.”
Incrementally raising the ages and cutting benefits of Medicare and SS until nobody collects it at all: “getting serious.”
“Incrementally raising the ages and cutting benefits for Medicare and SS until nobody collects it at all: “getting serious”.
Wow, if that’s the case I have better retire ASAP rather than putting off retirement as I have been doing fro the last several years.
(sarc meant, but I know people who actually think this way, as in “Once they start giving you benifits they can’t take them away.”)
‘I have better retire ASAP’
I commented a while back on this. I met a semi-retired guy with a pension and savings, who decided to take the SS money early. He told me it was because he figured it wouldn’t be around very long and he should recover some of the bucks that he paid in. He went on to say he didn’t need the money and was going to use it to buy a new car.
What sucks about this situation was it has always been plain as day in the numbers. But we’ve got this class of experts that can tell everyone (via the MSM of course) with a straight face that ‘SS isn’t broke, because we owe it to ourselves.’
Uh, OK.
The same thing goes for federal govt debt. ‘We just gotta grow our way out of it.’ And if all else fails ‘we can print the money’.
Somehow, these Keynesian fairy tales aren’t following the script. The ‘owe it to ourselves’ becomes ‘take that guys money and give it to grandma.’ Doesn’t sound as benevolent as owe it to ourselves, but it’s the same thing.
Anyway, it’s just deck chairs on the Titanic. Look how they went after Rick Perry when he said SS was a Ponzi scheme. I’ve said before that SS is a welfare program made to look like a Ponzi scheme.
watching the news last night about the UN vote with respect to Palestine my wife asked me “what does that mean?”
I told her it’s a sign that the U.S. sphere of influence is dwindling. Just like when Russia failed…all of their outlying countries started exiting and proclaiming independence. The only way the U.S. is different is that its sphere of influence was not defined totally by force or constructing walls…but through diplomacy, debt, and its reserve currency status.
Pax Americana is dying. The party will soon be over. It will take some time…ending in a full blown dollar currency crisis…but it will/is happening.
How did Rome die? Too many promises, too many wars…
the UN vote with respect to Palestine
The UN General Assembly has been voting in Palestine’s favor for 50 years.
“…voting in Palestine’s favor for 50 years.”
yet no statehood?
why now then?
yet no statehood?
why now then?
Do you know the difference between the General Assembly ( a toothless forum dominated by small, third world countries) and the Security Council (the Big Boyz with the guns,whose decisions carry weight, and on which the US has a permanent seat and a veto)?
Has Palestine become a state in its old borders? If the General Assembly were in charge, they would have.
if your point that the UN vote is not in any way whatsover one sign of the U.S.’s dwindling influence around the globe due to its involvment in the global credit crisis and its current reaction to that crisis then we can agree to disagree.
then we can agree to disagree.
I guess we’ll have to, because the UN General Assembly has been passing pro-Palestinian statehood pronouncements for fifty years.
How did Rome die? Too many promises, too many wars…
Rome ran out of people to enslave, rob, rape & steal from. Except for Armininus the Germanius, who stopped them on the Rhine.
“Once they start giving you benifits they can’t take them away.”
I think there’s some truths in it. It’s hard to get outraged about the cuts in benefits you never received.
It’s worse if you get cuts in benifits you expected to receive. You may become outraged but nevertheless you still get cut.
IMO in this economic climate a good job is a terrible thing to waste.
A good job? = promises of money are made good every payday.
Retired? = a throw of the dice.
Sorry Oxide, but Obama stated during the election he was against the massive cuts in defense that going over the cliff would entail. He does not want them because if they are made the economy supported with the sugar of deficit spending will go into a recession. He is banking on the fact that the Republicans will fold to avoid the defense cuts. However, I think he has overreached and the republicans are not going to raise taxes on the rich by $140 billion per year to avoid them, Remember the repeal of the tax cuts for those over $250,000 will only raise $50 billion compared to the one trillion dollar deficit. While the Republicans lose defense spending the democrats will lose social spending and tax credits on things like alternative energy. The Republicans have more bullets for this fight than the MSM seems to report.
Heard again on the radio this morning: Republicans saying that fixing the tax code (loopholes, etc.) will result in raising the same amount of money as letting the tax cuts expire, but do less damage to the economy.
Can someone explain this logic?
It’s simple: the latter will place the burden on the middle class.
Next question?
Simpson Bowles, Simpson Bowles, Simpson Bowles.
Jeebus.
Their plan SHOULD be the guide.
Under their plan, the top 0.1% pay 24% more in taxes, equal to an average of $735k per year MORE.
The top 1% pay 18% more in taxes, equal to an average of $112.5k per year MORE.
The 95-99th percentile pay on average $5k more (5% increase).
The 90-95th percentile pay on average $3.2k more (6% increase)
The 80-90th percentile pay on average $2.3k more (6.5% increase)
In quintile terms:
Lowest Quintile: Increase of $24 per year
2nd Quintile: Increase of $464 per year
3rd Quintile: Increase of $722 per year
4th Quintile: Increase of $1,193 per year
Top Quintile: Increase of $8,686 per year
It’s all in black and white in the plan on page 32.
You can’t tell me that the wealthy aren’t each bearing the vast majority of the burden of the tax reform. The code remains very progressive.
Nor can you tell me that a simplified tax code wouldn’t benefit the country as a whole (less time spent doing taxes is more time doing anything else (raising kids, sleeping, working, etc.)–removal of deductions will stop distorting incentives and allow capital to flow where it should more efficiently rather than where policymakers think it should flow, the less complex the code, the harder to find loopholes, and easier to comply).
How is Simpson/Bowles better than just going over the fiscal cliff?
I’m guessing that they want to ‘fix the loopholes’ so that they can quietly reinstate them at the next opportunity. Whereas, lowering the effective rate, once it has risen, will be more difficult.
I’m guessing that they want to ‘fix the loopholes’ so that they can quietly reinstate them at the next opportunity. Whereas, lowering the effective rate, once it has risen, will be more difficult.
Many are dubious that ‘closing the loopholes’ will gain nearly as much revenue as lowering the rates will lose.
“How is Simpson/Bowles better than just going over the fiscal cliff?”
didn’t simpson/bowles contain some form of entitlement reform?
didn’t simpson/bowles contain some form of entitlement reform?
Exactly, so it’s worse than going over the cliff. Besides, with the cliff, we get a for-sure rise in the rates of the rich, while in S/B we get a dubious promise that we’ll get more from them by greatly lowering their rates, then closing some ‘loopholes’, which sounds like a bunch of BS to me (and many tax experts).
What tax experts think that the S/B tax plan is BS?
The S/B proposal is not Romney’s proposal. It actually does raise revenue…the biggie is that it makes all capital gain just part of ordinary income. Folks like Romney would see their tax rate double (same with Buffett). Carried Interest would no longer be taxed at 15%, it would be at 28%.
In other words, the revenue increases are not illusory.
And the S/B proposal deals with fixing Soc Sec, and also reforms Medicare, and reforms how corporations are taxed.
If you actually take the time to thumb through the plan, you will see that what it does is:
1. raises revenue; and
2. reforms entitlements
And it has been ignored…why?
Because politicians on both sides are gutless wonders, where they can’t stand ACTUALLY raising revenue, or ACTUALLY cutting spending.
What tax experts think that the S/B tax plan is BS?
In no place does this refer to an analysis debunking that S/B will raise revenue. In fact, the following quote:
“The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities evaluated the draft plan, praising that it “puts everything on the table” but criticizing that it “lacks an appropriate balance between program cuts and revenue increases.”
Implies that it DOES raise revenues, just not enough for their taste.
yeah, and the Rasmussen poll had Romney up by 3 %
And if the election would have happened on that day, Romney would have won.
Coulda, woulda, shoulda …
I think more and more Republicans are happy they did not win seeing the uncoming recession. I voted third party and only thought Romney would do a slightly better job since both him and Obama share the same agenda that matters, creating, one world government. Moving jobs or money overseas does not matter when your loyalty is to that view.If you are going to create a north american union as a first step what difference does it make where Mexicans are when you start it since they will have the same mobility within the NAU as Europeans “enjoy” in the EU?
I voted third party and only thought Romney would do a slightly better job since both him and Obama share the same agenda
Dude, you were the biggest Romney cheerleader on the board. You can’t rewrite history this soon after it happened.
“I think more and more Republicans are happy they did not win”
i think that when obama realized he won his first thought was…”oh shit”.
Really Alpha please find one post where I even said I really like him. I did not even say he was the lesser of two evils until about a month before the election. You confuse my rejection of the board’s majority view that the election was over with support.
Occasionally proclaiming yourself a third party supporter who dislikes both parties in no way diminishes your tireless efforts on behalf of the Republican party before, during, and after, the election.
How dumb do you think we are?
“Dude, you were the biggest Romney cheerleader on the board. You can’t rewrite history this soon after it happened.”
Coming from the fingertips of the biggest communist on the board. Quite an achievement given the amount of communists posting here.
So you can’t find a post and you want to change the subject? Sorry but I will never post in support of a President that is bankrupting the country. The first thing he has to do to get my support is stop digging the hole deeper for the country. You do that when you have a budget that does not increase the debt to GDP ratio. He has never done that and he has put us past the critical ratio of a debt to GDP ratio of over 100%.
The second thing he has to do is stop printing money like Zimbabwe since every country which has tried it ends up with high inflation. I want the bipartisan Simpson/Bowles budget plan passed, that neither makes me a republican or a democrat. However, to the degree republicans are trying to stop the two main problems, I agree with them. To the degree they object to open borders I agree with them.
So you can’t find a post and you want to change the subject?
Everyone here witnessed your unceasing cheerleading for Romney. To try to claim you did otherwise is frankly bizarre.
Nick- I look forward to expropriating you.
Sorry I only date women.
Also, you could not expropriate a limp noodle without storm troopers from the gubmint, just like any other yellow statist.
Alpha, if I made so many comments just find one where I said Romney was anything but the lesser of two evils. You can’t just like you can never back up any of arguments with facts just personal attacks.
As far as I can tell, A-dan never really expressed liking for Romney qua Romney. But he was beating the Anybody But Obama drum, HARD. Looking hard for signs of hope in the polls. So hard in fact that he believed the pro-Romney polls as much as Romney did.
Just like the Kerry supporters did in 2004.
And lost.
Predicted here on HBB.
Actually 160 billion per year.
The republicans with their spending increases and revenue decreases are the problem. Luckily O is a moderate, fiscal conservative.
Remember when Bush asked the country for a minute of silence so he could think?
Mortgage relief? Really?
That’s a logical step forward after the massive success of handing out cell phones, I suppose.
http://obamaphone.net/how-do-i-get-an-obama-phone
Wall st got a $7 billion bail out, that must have really humiliated them!
Have you read the Colbert book? Hilarious!!
Notice how the Bush tax cuts, which were supposed to be temporary, arenow on the table alongside of Social Security benefits, for which Baby Boomers have been hosed into paying through the nose since 1983?
The 99 percent had better watch out for their wallets, as Republicans in Congress are vying to hand the Social Security benefits they have been forced to fund over their working lifetimes as a gift to the 1 percent in exchange for campaign contributions.
Bush tax cuts were meant to be temporary
1 hour ago
The solution to the so-called “fiscal cliff” is simple. The rationale for the Bush tax cuts was a dividend (a tax rate reduction) due to the surplus in the budget. Now there is no surplus and therefore the cuts should expire. The cuts were temporary — not permanent — and should have expired long two years ago but, due to the recession, were allowed to extend until Dec. 31 of this year.
On the other hand, so-called “entitlements” such as Social Security and Medicare, which have not contributed a penny to the deficit, are being targeted by the Republicans as being in need of immediate reform (reductions) or they will not go along with the president’s desire to see compromise. It seems to me that we should get rid of needless “entitlements” such as corporate welfare, tax loopholes allowing highly profitable corporations to escape paying any taxes, multibillion-dollar subsidies to companies that do not need them and a bloated defense budget that spends more than the next 20 nations on defense and does not make us any safer. These should be on the table along side the disappearance of the Bush tax cuts.
The Grover Norquist pledge that all the GOPers signed should be held as something that is un-American and as violating each representative’s solemn duty to represent the best interests of whom they represent and of the country in general. This pledge violates the spirit of representative government and the notion of compromise that moves us forward as a country and as a people.
John Berkowitz • St. Charles
We need to destroy the middle class in order to save it.
And reward the Producers.
Bloomberg - Goldman Sachs’s Blankfein, Cohn Take Profits on Options:
“Blankfein, 58, collected $2.78 million this week exercising 68,834 options that were due to expire this month and selling the underlying shares, adding to a $3.15 million gain last month, according to filings. Cohn, 52, reaped $3.64 million exercising 90,000 options and selling the shares, adding to $1.87 million made from sales in October, the filings show.”
But he’ll only have 2.39 million after paying his crushing taxes?
Poor dear…
“We need to destroy the middle class in order to save it.”
And replace it with a humbler and lower paid middle class. The American dream lives on!
“And replace it with a humbler and lower paid middle class.”
On the path toward Wells’ Eloi.
On the other hand, so-called “entitlements” such as Social Security and Medicare, which have not contributed a penny to the deficit, are being targeted by the Republicans as being in need of immediate reform (reductions)
I’ve said this before, the GOP wants that money to pay for more guns and wars. And the electorate might just be stupid enough to give it to them.
more guns and wars
Keep your government hands off our private-sector, for-profit, bootstrapping, invisible hand of free market, government contractor paychecks!
The GOP wants to means test SS and vouchers for medicare. They want this because the alternative is poison to them; raising the cap on FICA or increasing the medicare %.
There’s so much wrong with this post it’s just incomprehensible. Let’s start with the Democrat lie that SS pays for itself. Here’s an excerpt from the Left-wing Annenberg Project, Factcheck.org.
Even they don’t agree:
Some senior Democrats are claiming that Social Security does not contribute “one penny” to the federal deficit. That’s not true. The fact is, the federal government had to borrow $37 billion last year to finance Social Security, and will need to borrow more this year. The red ink is projected to total well over half a trillion dollars in the coming decade.
President Barack Obama was closer to the mark than some of his Democratic allies when he said that Social Security is “not the huge contributor to the deficit that [Medicare and Medicaid] are.” That’s correct: Medicare and Medicaid consume more borrowed funds than Social Security, and their costs are growing more rapidly. But Obama’s own budget director, Jacob Lew, was misleading when he wrote recently that “Social Security benefits are entirely self-financing.” That’s not true, except in a very narrow, legalistic sense, and doesn’t change the fact that Social Security is now a small but growing drain on the government’s finances.
Payroll taxes exceeded benefit payments regularly until 2010. But the fact is that Social Security has now passed a tipping point, beyond which the Congressional Budget Office projects that it will permanently pay out more in benefits than it gathers from Social Security taxes.
Next, the Corporate tax structure here in the US is the highest in the developed world. It’s unfortunate that loopholes allow many to escape taxes. Romney was talking about fixing this. He was not elected. Your hero was. Please tell us what changes he proposes???
He won’t propose any, as usual. I vote “PRESENT”> You guys do the hard work of finding any cuts so I can BLAME YOU when elections come.
As for the Pledge, agreeing to not spend more than you take in is UnAmerican and unpatriotic??
Get real. It’s common sense. WE see the DEMOCRATS haven’t issued a “BUDGET” since Obama got into the Whitehouse, passing continuing resolutions to keep spending. It’s a disgrace. Someone needs to act like an adult and make hard decisions about what can be done with available resources. The ONLY solution democrats have is to SPEND MORE, and find “revenue enhancements”, code talk for more tax money.
The 2001 tax cuts were only temporary so that the 50 Republicans+Cheney in the Senate could sidestep a Democratic filibuster. It’s the same Senate Reconciliation procedure that “shoved Obamacare down our throats.”
If the R’s could passed them as permanent, they would have. Actually, if the tax cuts had retired the national debt by 2010, as predicted by the Heritage Foundation,* they surely would have renewed them, as there would no need to raise the taxes again anyway.
———–
*Wikipedia for “Bush Tax Cuts” has the reference to this report.
The 2001 tax cuts were passed, because we had this supposed “surplus”. Republicans ignored Social Security’s solvency.
Now, they want to drag SS in as part of any “deal”.
As long as Republicans are around, true Keynesnian economics will always fail. All “surpluses”, whether real or perceived, will be given back to the “producers”. Any stimulus needed during times of recession/depression will be done with printed-out-of-thin air helicopter money.
The funny thing is that only the budget was a surplus. We still had bunches of total debt. Where were the R’s then? Saying that we should keep the good times going until they wound the National Debt Clock back down near 0?
Yeah, I didn’t think so either.
George Carlin was right on the money.
In more ways than one.
obama extended them…they are now the obama tax cuts.
Right. Calling him a socialist rather than a conservative does not make it so. His contribution was to add the payroll tax cut to it.
i’m one of those wacko’s that doesn’t think he is a conservative or a socialist.
yet another illustration that his policies are no different from Bush…and the fact that he just extended some other president’s policies rather that drafting and passing his on tax reform is another sign he is just an empty suit.
who wasn’t an empty suit the last 40 yrs beside Clinton and his mighty veto!
Yup! They will be the much-loved ObamaTaxCuts on the Middle Class. The ObamaTaxHikes on the Rich — well, those will be much-loved too.
i think it’s going to end up being the ObamaTaxHikes on everybody.
Which the American People will lay squarely at the foot of the House Republicans.
The House Republicans, the supposed party of tax cuts, have been screaming for Tax Cuts for decades…. until it’s tax cuts on the regular folks. And then suddenly tax cuts aren’t so great? The R’s have shown their true colors for all The People to see.
First, I’d like to thank Ben for the kind shout-out in the November Bits Buckets, and send a huge cyber hug to everyone who purchased my book over this last month. Compared to some of the knock-down-drag-outs I’ve engaged in here on HBB, recapitulating all my misadventures in print was a breeze.
Secondly, my son informs me that if I am to publicize the thing, I must go the social media route where I am supposed to plug myself shamelessly. So I’d like to ask those of you who have enjoyed my posts over the years to go here: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Chomp-Chomp-Chomp/393981680682150 and click the “like” button so I can shut him up.
Again, my sincere thanks to everyone for all your support and encouragement as I’ve put my pieces back together. We have got to be the coolest dysfunctional extended family EVER.
AHansen,
Please see my post concerning your comments further below in the comments section. I am anxiously awaiting the evidence of Obama’s brilliant legal writings and opinions. Since you seem to be the only one who has read them, I simply want a link to read them, too. That will shut me up, when I am able to see the splendor of such a great legal mind, by way of actual WRITTEN articles, authored by Obama (not the story-book fictions about the made-up life of Barry Soetoro).
Again, jumping into your rhetoric without fully understanding what you’re responding to. Kneejerk hatred doesn’t serve the truth.
Who said anything about legal writings? (Hint: it wasn’t me) It’s called “Dreams From My Father” (you can google it for yourself, I presume?) and it was published in 1993, long before Barack Obama ran for any office, let alone considered running for the Presidency. I wish I could write that beautifully. Additionally, Obama was appointed visiting professor of Constitutional Law at University of Chicago — a post they don’t hand out to the average political fraud.
If you spent half as much time thinking for yourself as you do parroting AM radio, you’d be a lot more convincing. Turn on CSPAN sometime, you might develop some perspective of your own.
PS. I grew up in the projects and I’ve eaten dog meat in Malaysia. Does that make me Black Muslim?
Your incident received nationwide attention. Marketing can be odious but yield worthwhile results if done assiduously and carefully. Best of luck.
Thanks, neuro.
Why should middle-income families in Flyover Country be forced to cross-subsidize mortgages on houses in Silicon Valley with the mortgage interest deduction?
‘Taint fair.
“Mortgage-interest deduction may be cut ‘fiscal cliff’ negotiations”
Speaky no English, Mr Editor?
Business
Mortgage-interest deduction may be cut ‘fiscal cliff’ negotiations
Posted: 11/30/2012 12:01:00 AM MST
By Pete Carey
San Jose Mercury News
As Congress looks for new sources of revenue to deal with the looming “fiscal cliff,” a popular ingredient of the American dream could be on the chopping block.
It’s the mortgage-interest tax break, which allows taxpayers to cut their taxable income by the amount of interest they pay on their home loans.
Long seen as an untouchable “third rail” in Washington, D.C., the break is now on the table as the Obama administration and Republicans look for more tax revenue. While the real-estate industry argues that the break is essential to keep the housing market healthy, some economists are not convinced, and the deduction is a fat target because it primarily benefits high-income households and those who live in expensive housing markets.
“It’s incredibly significant to me,” said Satish Shenoy, who is shopping for a home in California’s Silicon Valley for his young family. “The mortgage deduction is one big reason to buy a house, versus renting,” he said.
…
Nobody will “eliminate” the MID. The most they will do is limit it to primary homes and/or place a cap. The one cap bandied about is $35K, which is $800K mortgage at 4%. If that’s not good enough for Mr. Shenoy, then he can rent.
“The one cap bandied about is $35K, which is $800K mortgage at 4%.”
In other words, it’s a cap just for show, to ‘punish the 1%’ for owning big fancy houses, with no relevance to bringing down the fiscal deficit.
how does any increase in revenue, not help the balance sheets?
My recollection is that the $35k cap was for all itemized deductions so that $35K would have to cover your MID, your property tax deduction, your charitable contributions, your state/county income taxes (or sales tax if your state doesn’t have an income tax) and possibly your employer provided health insurance (if they make that taxable income, not an excludable fringe benefit).
If it was $35K and all of the above were included, well, it wouldn’t just be a restriction on people with $800K mortgages.
I don’t know, I read it here.
What $35K the Romney figure? I have a hard time believing this, as NO wealthy person would be satisfied with deducting only $35K on hundreds of thousands of dollars in income.
That was Romney’s proposal whether you believe it or not. It was a total cap on all itemized deductions. He gave several options of what the highest number might have been and never specified exactly which deductions would go inside the restriction (possibility of charitable being exempt, I think), but that was the proposal.
It was his plan but I actually think it was capped at $25,000.
NO wealthy person would be satisfied with deducting only $35K on hundreds of thousands of dollars in income.
The truly wealthy don’t care about income tax rates.
Income is for little people.
Ding ding ding! Thanks Alpha. I knew something was wrong with that. Yeah, what would Romney care about capping WAGES at $25K? The last W-2 he received was in 2004.
the loan cap now is $ 1.1 M…i think they will end up just lowering that rather than capping the acutal interest allowable.
“The mortgage deduction is one big reason to buy a house, versus renting,” he said.
I bet Satish has no clue about supply and demand.
What is fair these days? .
Enron?
Haliburton?
wars for oil?
farm subsidies?
oil co tax breaks?
teachers unions
attorneys
prop 13 in ca
prop 13 owns, stop whining.
i tell people who voted for Romney the same thing every day
prop 13 gets a handout
It blows my mind that some people think Obama is a socialist!
His spending habits make Reagan and Bush look like Marxists! I am glad we finally have a fiscal conservative in the white house, even if he is a “liberal-commi” in the eyes of the ignorant.
Yeah I feel you on that.
People think he’s black too when he acts more like a white person than most white people.
Also, I think he intentionally married a black woman darker than himself in order to amp up his black “cred” which he REALLY needed in order minimize his “Professor Gleason Golightly” aura.
Just sayin.
What percentage of the GDP is government spending under him? That is the bottom line, he is far from a fiscal conservative that is why he has added six trillion to the debt and his proposal does not even make a dent in the deficit. He will add more debt during his time in office than virtually all the presidents in our history put together but keep trying to spin it. All you need to see where we are going is to look at California now, same type policies. That is why people cannot flee from California quick enough.
From Yahoo today on where people are moving:
How about the biggest losers? From 2000-09, the metropolitan areas that suffered the biggest net domestic migration losses resemble something of an urbanist dream team: New York, which saw a net outflow of a whopping 1.9 million citizens, followed by the Los Angeles metro area (-1,337,522), Chicago, Detroit, and, despite recent improvements, San Francisco-Oakland. The raw numbers make it clear that California has lost its appeal for migrants from other parts of the U.S., and has become an exporter of people and talent (and income).
Hopefully it will lead to the housing crash II in CA. I am waiting on the sidelines with ALL cash!
Here is federal spending as a percentage of the GDP. Manipulate, lie and spin is all this administration can do, solve something? Never.
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_20th_century_chart.html
solve?
ended one war
killed OBL
brought us health insurance reform
cut 600,000 gov jobs
cut taxed for middle class
added $4.6B to veteran admin (wars are expensive!)
Eliminated subsidies to private lender middlemen of student loans and protect student borrowers
Signed financial reform law requiring lenders to verify applicants’ credit history, income, and employment status
Signed financial reform law establishing a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to look out for the interests of everyday Americans (got bubbles)
The surge let the Iraq war end and he opposed it. OBL was killed with information developed during the Bush administration. Obama care solved the health care problems? We will soon find that it only made things worse? I could go on but why, you don’t want to see reality.
“The surge let the Iraq war end and he opposed it. OBL was killed with information developed during the Bush administration. Obama care solved the health care problems? We will soon find that it only made things worse? I could go on but why, you don’t want to see reality.”
Right. Give him no credit for anything good that happened on his watch and give him all of the blame for anything bad that happened. I get it.
he surge let the Iraq war end and he opposed it. OBL was killed with information developed during the Bush administration.
Your knowledge of recent history is comparable to your predictive skills in the last presidential election- very lacking.
I’m sure you’ve got some ludicrous ‘proof’ cooked up by some think tank to prove your points, so here’s you chance. I bet it will be as accurate as your presidential polls turned out to be.
Since I never predicted the last election, it appears that my skills are better than your reading skills.
BUsh’s wars and 2009 budget ARE very costly as is his Medicare B for $600B…. all unpaid for….
cough, cough and off the books
No, they were all part of the national debt. Would you like to try again?
…says the man who thinks Nobel scientists are wrong.
Does anyone have a figure handy for the sum total underwaterness of all fifty U.S. state pension systems together?
Ky. Voices: Pension woes put Ky. on the road to Greece
Published: November 1, 2012
By Fred A. Pope
Athens, Greece has riots as public pensions are cut. To get votes, politicians gave out more than was put into the pension system.
Athens, Kentucky could see riots as citizens across the commonwealth face the same problem. Our public pension funds are $30 billion-plus under water.
When Greece tried to sell bonds to continue the pensions, the size of the debt became known and smart Greeks and business owners sold their property and moved out. That left a collapsed housing market and economy.
It is rumored some Kentucky legislators want to float bonds to get rid of our pension debt. To get anyone to buy the bonds, the real numbers must be disclosed and then our smart citizens could sell and move out. Kentucky doesn’t have enough people to pay off the principal and interest on $30 billion.
Like in Greece, Kentucky’s pension funds are insolvent because of legislators’ abuse, giving away more than was paid into the system.
“Spiking,” allows a participant’s take-out to be based upon their highest three years’ salary, regardless of what they paid in. That’s how you bankrupt a pension fund.
Another abuse allows participants to buy five qualifying years for a nominal fee. We have participants retiring in their early forties. Combined with spiking, this leads to the double and triple-dippers in the system.
Legislators gave public employees these things to get their votes, then voted themselves pensions and are now using spiking and buying years to rob the pension funds. When legislators passed a small pension, some were thrown out of office, but the ones left were emboldened to go for more.
If you have ever been on a farm, you know hogs will not eat from a small bucket if they can get to a full trough. In 2005, the legislators went whole hog with a law making their part-time years count as full-time for pensions at the spiked rate. If they could get a high-paying state job for just three years, they could retire rich.
Let’s call their 2005 law what it is: stealing. There are no clean hands. Both Republican and Democrat legislators crossed the aisle to get to the trough.
…
Let’s call their 2005 law what it is: stealing.
But the law was all done by duly elected representatives of the peeps, legal-like, fair & square. Kwicherbichen!
” In 2005, the legislators went whole hog with a law making their part-time years count as full-time for pensions at the spiked rate. If they could get a high-paying state job for just three years, they could retire rich.”
One of the many reasons I’m dubious that state government is superior to federal government.
Thieves and crooks are the same, whether they where suits and sit in an office in Washington DC or some state capitol.
Here’s an idea, keep your damn greedy hands off my money, earned with my labor. That’s where this starts and ends.
need more coffee… that should have been “wear” not where.
The question of who gets stiffed when a municipality runs out of funds to keep its pension system afloat may soon face some interesting legal tests.
Exclusive: Calpers triggers legal fight with bankrupt San Bernardino over pension debt
Tim Reid and Peter Henderson Reuters
3:33 a.m. CST, November 28, 2012
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - America’s biggest public pension moved aggressively against the bankrupt city of San Bernardino, California, on Tuesday night over the city’s decision to halt payments to the fund.
The move laid bare a high-stakes battle shaping up between Wall Street and state pension funds over how they are treated when cities run out of money.
The powerful California Public Employees’ Retirement System (Calpers) filed a legal motion declaring its intention to sue San Bernardino for millions of dollars in pension arrears, a move that the fund has never before had to make in a municipal bankruptcy.
San Bernardino, a city of 210,000 about 60 miles east of Los Angeles, filed for bankruptcy protection on August 1. Since then, it has halted its bi-weekly, $1.2 million payment to Calpers, saying it wants to defer any payments to the fund until fiscal year 2013-2014. Calpers says the city is already $6.9 million in arrears since August 1.
The San Bernardino bankruptcy is fast emerging as a precedent-setting case over how creditors, especially Wall Street bondholders and insurers, are treated in a municipal bankruptcy, because never before has a city seeking bankruptcy halted payments to Calpers or threatened its historical primacy as a creditor.
Under Californian state law, the contract between Calpers and debtor cities is viewed as inviolate and has been treated as such by state courts. Unlike Calpers, other creditors have historically been forced to renegotiate or forgive debt to debtor cities.
The Californian city of Stockton, also seeking bankruptcy protection, decided to keep current on all payments to Calpers, as did the city of Vallejo, which emerged from bankruptcy in 2011.
San Bernardino’s decision to halt its payments, and its move on Monday night to include in a new budget an attempt to renegotiate the terms of its debt with Calpers, is uncharted territory for the pension fund. Wall Street bondholders and insurers have already indicated their intention to test Calpers’ primacy as a creditor in the San Bernardino case.
Calpers, one of the biggest pension funds in the world, serves many cities and counties in California. It is San Bernardino’s biggest creditor. The city, which has a nearly $46 million deficit for the current fiscal year, lists its unfunded pension obligations to Calpers at $143.3 million. Calpers says if the city halted its relationship with the fund immediately, the debt would be $319.5 million.
Under the U.S. bankruptcy code, all legal actions against a debtor city by creditors are stayed until the bankruptcy has been approved, or thrown out.
In the legal motion filed to the bankruptcy judge overseeing the San Bernardino case shortly before midnight on Tuesday, Calpers asked for that stay to be lifted so it could redeem its debt in a state court. It also said even if the stay was not lifted, it would still seek redress in a state court.
Calpers expressly stated that it was “concerned about inappropriate preferential treatment that might be given to other creditors” in San Bernardino’s bankruptcy. Calpers has long argued that pension contributions cannot be touched, even in a bankruptcy.
The move by Calpers is the opening battle that could see the case move all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, America’s highest court, said Karol Denniston, a Californian bankruptcy expert who authored part of the state’s bankruptcy code.
…
Calpers has long argued that pension contributions cannot be touched, even in a bankruptcy.
You can’t argue blood from a turnip.
I was thinking the same thing. However, correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t this about who gets what blood there is, if there isn’t enough blood to go around? Sort of like someone trying to figure out should they pay the cable bill or the electric bill?
Who’s it gonna be? Wall Street or the pensioners? Now THAT is an interesting dilemma.
Who’s it gonna be? Wall Street or the pensioners? Now THAT is an interesting dilemma.
IIRC, bond holders are typically at the front of the line.
But in this case the bond-holders (CalPERS) ARE the pensioners.
Oh well….
Guess they shoulda blood-doped when they had the chance.
Municipalities aren’t turnips. If they were (had NO money/cash flow at all) it would be easy. It just turns out that they are horses, not elephants. You can’t get as much blood from a horse as an elephant, but you can get some. The question is who gets the limited supply. There are three main recipients: current government functions, bond holders, CALPERS.
You can’t argue blood from a turnip.
A competent lawyer is able to argue a dead man back to life. But only a central banker can conjure money out of nothing at all.
My sister-in-law once got a grand jury to fail to pass down an indictment on a gun charge even though the guy was clearly in violation of the law and admitted it in testimony. Never underestimate what a really good lawyer can accomplish given the right facts to play around in.
Good luck with CalPERS ever collecting a penny from San Berdo, as its property tax base all moved back to Mexico two years ago.
Can’t squeeze blood out of a rolling stone.
For how much longer will underwater borrowers be able to collect hundreds of thousands of dollars of tax free income (aka “debt relief”) if they short sell?
ECONOMY
November 29, 2012, 9:08 p.m. ET
Tax Hit Looms on Mortgage Relief
By NICK TIMIRAOS
Troubled homeowners who get a break from their mortgage lenders might not be so lucky with Uncle Sam, and could face hefty tax bills unless Congress acts to extend a key provision.
The tax provision currently allows some homeowners—mostly those facing foreclosure—to avoid paying taxes on certain relief they receive on their mortgages.
The provision covers mortgages where lenders forgive a portion of the principal, a key component in the $25 billion federal-state settlement over mortgage-foreclosure abuses. It also affects homeowners who do “short sales,” where banks agree to allow a property to be sold for less than the debt owed.
In 2007, as the foreclosure crisis erupted, Congress exempted homeowners from treating some forgiven mortgage debt as taxable income, in a bid to encourage banks and borrowers to seek foreclosure alternatives. But that provision is set to expire Dec. 31, causing headaches for homeowners such as Brad and Connie Bates.
Mr. Bates has been working since August to get his mortgage company, Bank of America Corp., to approve the sale of his three-bedroom home in St. Petersburg, Fla., for less than the $180,000 he owes. He has a buyer willing to pay just $65,000, and the shortfall would be counted as income if Congress doesn’t extend the tax-relief provision.
“If they don’t get together and deal with this tax problem, it just creates a disincentive to do the responsible thing,” says Mr. Bates, a 58-year-old retired Air Force veteran who bought the home in 2001. “The tax hit is going to be enormous.”
…
“If they don’t get together and deal with this tax problem, it just creates a disincentive to do the responsible thing,” says Mr. Bates, a 58-year-old retired Air Force veteran who bought the home in 2001.”
The responsible thing is to pay your mortgage, jerkoff. Just pay it. Or take your lumps.
If Bates forecloses, is the amount still taxable? What is the FICO hit for a foreclosure vs. a short sale? Bates may be better off foreclosing and/or declaring BK.
“a disincentive to do the responsible thing?”
I’m failing to understand what ‘responsible thing’ Mr. Bates is trying to do?
I don’t see anything here about Mr. Bates not being able to pay his mortgage. It looks like he simply doesn’t want to, now that the house is worth less than he paid for it. His government pension surely allows him to make his payments. He could get a part-time job to help out.
Whiner.
Answer: Forever
Here are other things that will go on forever:
1) Money Printing
2) Low interest rates - from Fed purchasing bonds nobody want thru (see #1)
3) Trillion $ deficits - although, some day soon, the term quadrillion will enter our vernacular.. just as “Trillion” sneaked in a few years ago.
4) Campaign contributions from Lobbyists breaking records each year
5) Over-indebted losers whinning that they’re “victims” & expect gov’t handouts - & they’ll get them
6) Falling housing demand eroding prices
My guess: forever. (Until the music stops.)
Remember, this is not about houses. It’s turning into a bailout of our “way of life.”
The NAR-scum pimping media always term it as “relief for homeowners”, not “bailouts for f*cked borrowers”. Sickening…
‘how much longer will underwater borrowers be able to collect hundreds of thousands of dollars of tax free income’
‘Here are other things that will go on forever: 1) Money Printing. 2) Low interest rates - from Fed purchasing bonds nobody want thru (see #1). 3) Trillion $ deficits’
It’s always interesting to see myths shattered and no one notices. Think about this; money printing forever and low interest rates. If this is the case, you can fire just about every economics professor. How is it that these two things can exist for so long at the same time?
The government and central bank don’t want to talk about it. See, in their world, as long as inflation (by extension interest rates) are low, they are free to create as much money as possible. So what if they are crushing pension plans and others? They are saving us from the Great Depression, dammit!
But if some theories that explained this situation were understood, which showed these people are digging a deeper hole, like Japan has, they might have to stop printing money, running deficits, or even have to get a real job.
is owning a home a new gateway to welfare benis?
It has been lately. Will it be forever?
is owning a home a new gateway to welfare benis?
As a renter, I had no housing safety net whatsoever. Can’t pay rent - for whatever reason - 3 day notice to quit. Sure, eviction procedures could take some time, but nowhere as long as the foreclosure process.
It’s not fair, but there it is.
The NAR-scum pimping media always term it as “relief for homeowners”, not “bailouts for f*cked borrowers”. Sickening…
“Dollars for deadbeats” has a catchy sound to you, don’t you think?
Dough For Dumps
can you explain how the underwater loan owner, gets free income if they short sell?
I want in!
They don’t have to claim the forgiven debt as income ….. but that is ending soon.
The market is booming,
but where are the buyers,
inventory is looming,
reatturds are liars.
It’s been a while since this was re-posted:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPIxrzmatq0
Who else would stoop so low as to take the worst attributes of a man and woman and make a commercial out of it?
Oh…. that’s right REALTOR and lying thieving NAR.
How many divorces (or loveless marriages because they can’t afford to divorce) have been caused by overpriced housing and albatross mortgage debt slavery in the past several years?
How many incidents of spousal/domestic abuse have been caused by overpriced housing and albatross mortgage debt slavery in the past several years?
How many incidents of child abuse/neglect have been caused by overpriced housing and albatross mortgage debt slavery in the past several years?
That’s NAR-scum “family values” for you. They are financial and psychological terrorists.
I can’t watch that commercial without wanting to punch the wife in the face. And I’m a pacifist!
Blackstone is buying houses, that ought to tell you something.
From CNBC today an interesting point, however, the time I read anything about it in the Economist it had houses 19% undervalued so there is still some value particularly if rents continue to go up month after month at a .2% rate as measured by the CPI:
Home prices have been rising steadily for the past several months, but some fear the rapid increase could actually start hurting the housing recovery.
The reason is that the rise in prices is mainly due to investors, mostly large hedge funds, that have been swooping into the most distressed markets and inhaling properties as fast as their plentiful cash will allow. They are turning those properties into rentals, and getting anywhere from 8 to 12 percent returns on their investments, thanks to still hot demand. The trouble is, as home prices rise, those returns shrink.
“The worry with investment demand is that the very recovery in prices that it is driving will eventually reduce rental yields and undermine the investment case,” warns Paul Diggle of Capital Economics.
“Home prices have been rising steadily for the past several months”
Guess again bud. Prices resumed their declines in october.
The trouble is, as home prices rise, those returns shrink.
What is your reasoning for this?
Actually it was not my reasoning that was from CNBC. However, it is quite simple the higher amount paid for the house, the less of percentage return the investor makes assuming the rent as a constant.
Say house rents for 1,000 a month, if you bought it for $50,000 you earn a 25% return (ignoring compounding) if you buy for 100,000 that is reduced to 12.5%.
Oh ok, you mean the return if you buy more houses. I thought you meant that the the return on any given house that you bought a couple years ago would shrink.
I suppose if prices rose so much that the ROI couldn’t keep up with rising rents, then it would be more profitable to sell.
Yes and actually it should be a 48,000 and 96,000 house to make the numbers work.
Cooling house prices? I think it is still far from real cooling. Sooner or later, the prices will drop for more than 2-3 per cent. Following the “Canadian census from 2011, median age is growing and population over 65 is now representing more than 10 per cent of the Canadian population. These baby-boomers represent a real threat to the RE market, because they put an extreme pressure on the prices of the real estate. Unsurprisingly, number of private property has grown as well (for 7 per cent). So the debt run economy is still working its way to a major depression.
People on welfare are the middle class. There is no lower class. Ask O.
SNAP cards
School lunches (and breakfasts)
Earned Income Tax Credits
Section 8 vouchers
Obama phones
All of which will guarantee a permanent Democratic super majority
There is no lower class.
Yeah, I guess all those run down trailer parks and apartment complexes are inhabited by extraterrestrials.
Yeah, but have you been inside those Lucky Ducky dwellings? They all have flatscreen TV’s (paid for by Obama), granite and stainless (paid for by Obama), free heat and electric (paid for by Obama), and fridges full of steaks and lobster (paid for by Obama).
Quoting the eternal wisdom of Oakland rapper Too $hort, “there’s money in the ghetto”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VxO39ry7fzs
WSJ - Recession Big Factor as Birthrate Falls:
“A steep decline in births among immigrant women hard hit by the recent recession is the driving force behind the record low U.S. birthrate, according to the Pew Research Center.
Immigrant women, both legal and illegal, still have a higher birthrate than the U.S. population as a whole. Yet the rate for foreign-born women dropped 14% between 2007 and 2010, to 87.8 births per 1,000 women ages 15 to 44, compared with a 6% decline for U.S.-born women, to 58.9 births. The birthrate plunged 19% for immigrants of Hispanic origin during that period; among Mexicans, the largest group among Hispanics, the rate plunged 23%.
In addition to economic conditions, the U.S. birthrate has been affected by a slowdown in new arrivals. Immigration from Mexico, the biggest source country, reached a net zero in 2010, with as many Mexicans returning to Mexico as entering the U.S., according to Pew.
Immigration has propelled demographic changes in the U.S. for several decades, so any sustained decline in birthrates could affect the pace of growth of the minority population. The U.S. population is poised to reach “majority-minority” status, when less than half the population is white, around 2040, demographers say.”
The only good part of this bad economy is the fact that we are closer to ZPG. We would have been there years ago if environmental groups like the Sierra Club had not demonstrated that they were more about promoting democrats than protecting the environment. How anyone can call themselves an environmentalist and then not want to restrict immigration to this country is beyond me.
Global warming is now beyond the tipping point that any changes to humanoid behavior can reverse. Expect massive drought induced famines across the globe by the end of this century. Only after a massive die-off of humanoids can the planet begin the centuries-long process of healing.
Sorry goon squad but global warming stopped more than 15 years ago and we did not even reach the temperatures that we achieved in other interglacial periods. In fact we are more than one degree C below those peaks. Droughts are a natural part of cycles and as long as the Atlantic is warm and the Pacific is cold, you can expect them in the continental U.S.
Go to http://www.climate4you.com, instead of going back to 1880, go back 8,000 years and see just how much colder we are even now than we were back then.
You don’t get it. We don’t want a reduced lifestyle or carbon credits, we want global warming to go beyond the tipping point. This is the only way the humanoid species will learn that infinite growth in a finite ecosystem is not possible.
infinite growth in a finite ecosystem is not possible.
Expand the ecosystem… or to quote Buzz Lightyear “To Infiniti and Beyond”.
Even if FTL travel is possible, that doesn’t mean we’ll find inhabitable worlds the way Columbus discovered inhabitable continents.
I’m sure there are worlds in the “goldilocks” zone, but that doesn’t mean that they will be suitable to our biology. They might already have incompatible biospheres. And if they don’t, then we’ll have to Terraform them, which could take eons to accomplish. Given our propensity for short term gains I doubt we would ever do that.
I know that in Star Trek the galaxy is crawling with class M planets with Earth like biospheres, but in reality that is highly unlikely.
We all know that everyone who posts on HBB is rich and smart and beautiful and immune from the problems of the future, but who is honestly looking forward to their descendants sharing a finite ecosystem with 12 billion, 15 billion, 20 billion Lucky Ducky humanoids?
Sorry kidz, your future is f*cked
Yeah, but it makes for good science-fiction
Who wants to embrace the reality of life stuck in this solar system… in all probability, no father away from Earth then the moon or mars.
And then there is dealing with the challenges of constant danger of cosmic and solar radiation, the long-term consequences of low/no gravity on human skeletal and muscle structure, the lack of atmosphere and easily accessible water, etc.
who is honestly looking forward to their descendants sharing a finite ecosystem with 12 billion, 15 billion, 20 billion Lucky Ducky humanoids?
I don’t see it happening. Access to water and food are the constraints, and I don’t see us being able to produce enough food, given the limited access to water available. A die-off will happen, whether from war, pestilence, famine or some combination of the three. It’s nature’s way and humanity is not immune, even with our penchant for developing technological solutions.
And before you say war isn’t natural, war is the natural extension of competition, just at a higher organizational level…
infinite growth in a finite ecosystem is not possible.
Why do you hate capitalism so much?
Why do you hate capitalism so much?
San Francisco is commie.
“I won’t shake hands with anybody from San Francisco” — President Richard Nixon
“then we’ll have to Terraform them, which could take eons to accomplish” ………not to mention the obvious problem with Reevers!!!
not to mention the obvious problem with Reevers
LOL! I love Firefly, and Cowboy Bebop too. I just wonder where they find all these human friendly biospheres.
Only after a massive die-off of humanoids can the planet begin the centuries-long process of healing.
The thing about a “die off” is that it will happen mostly in the poorest countries and no one will give a rat’s patootie about them, while the more well off nations continue to consume.
Are you forgetting the Dust Bowl conditions of 1930’s USA? Just imagine that, but permanently. And on a local note, if this winter stays as dry as it’s been, expect even more wildfires in 2013
No goon, the 1930’s were also a period of a warm Atlantic and a cold Pacific. Within a few years the Atlantic should start to cool. I agree that 2013 could be an active fire year but due to natural not manmade causes.
Well it’s starting off to be quite a wet year here in Salinas. More rain again today. Heavy rain and gusty winds. I love it! Sitting here by the fireplace looking out an eight foot sliding glass door drinking hot chocolate without a house in sight, just trees and greenery.
Are you forgetting the Dust Bowl conditions of 1930’s USA?
I didn’t say there wouldn’t be hardship in the first world, but the nations that will succumb to famine will be the poor ones. And few will care.
The dust bowl was in the midwest, people moved to CA during that period, your observation is entirely consistent with the pattern.
“Yeah, but it makes for good science-fiction ”
I want my own terra form planet like in Firefly and the companion. I guy can dream can’t he?
How anyone can call themselves an environmentalist and then not want to restrict immigration to this country is beyond me.
Agreed. The bottom line is that none of the PTB want to restrict immigration, for different reasons.
The angry white guys used to be fine with “Hay-soos” doing their landscaping, but now that it might mean the end of the GOP they are having a severe case of buyer’s remorse.
I fully agree with your post.
The angry white guys used to be fine with “Hay-soos” doing their landscaping, but now that it might mean the end of the GOP they are having a severe case of buyer’s remorse.
Really? I read that GOP is warming up to the idea of an amnesty after Romney got his a$$ caned. Talk about the idiots in GOP always learning the wrong lessons.
(BTW I support amnesty and it should have happened long ago for humanitarian reasons, nothing else. It never seems to amuse me how republicans are playing right into Democrats’ Machiavellian attempt to increase democratic voter base.)
Amnesty is seen as a moral hazard. If you grant amnesty to one generation, then you’re open to being flooded by a new generation of immigrants who also know they will be rewarded with amnesty.
Amnesty is seen as a moral hazard.
Exactly. Amnesty rewards bad behavior… reinforcing those who wish to circumvent our immigration laws. It isn’t about the “humane” thing or the “right” thing, it is about the principle.
Either we are a nation that follows the rule of law or we are not.
‘Amnesty rewards bad behavior’
On both sides of the border. Mexico has exported their unemployment and discontent for decades, which allows their ruling class to perpetuate the corruption and injustices there. We aren’t doing the Mexican people any favors to allow illegal immigration; in fact we are making Mexican political reform more unlikely.
From our viewpoint, I may want to live or work in Mexico, but they put serious restrictions on that possibility. How about we give them the same deal they give us?
NE, if you don’t want MS-13 in your neighborhood, you are a nativist and a Racist®.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS-13
if you don’t want MS-13 in your neighborhood, you are a nativist and a Racist®.
When you decide to be something, you can be it. That’s what they don’t tell you in the church. When I was your age they would say we can become cops, or criminals. Today, what I’m saying to you is this: when you’re facing a loaded gun, what’s the difference?
From our viewpoint, I may want to live or work in Mexico, but they put serious restrictions on that possibility. How about we give them the same deal they give us?
NPR piece today on NAFTA. Turns out Mexico is one of the largest TV manufacturers in the world and chances are if you own a TV here in the US, it was manufactured in Mexico. How is that you say? The electronics are from Asia, but parts like plastic molding as well as final assembly are done in Mexico. Turns out NAFTA allows all TV’s “manufactured” in Mexico to enter the US duty free. Tariffs exist for TV’s from other countries, like China, and given the low profit margin on TV’s, around 5% max, those tariffs can be the difference between profit and loss. So manufacturers have set up shop in Mexico, near the US border, to take advantage of the trade agreement.
Someone is getting a raw deal on this, and I think it might be the US manufacturing worker, though I suppose NAFTA was great for US trucking…
…….and the railroads, especially KC Southern and Union Pacific.
“BTW I support amnesty and it should have happened long ago for humanitarian reasons, nothing else.”
I have co-workers of hispanic decent who say this. They argue that they are just poor people trying to have a better life and that the border should be open. If you mention that there are similar people in Africa and Asia, they are not so open to letting all of their poor in.
From our viewpoint, I may want to live or work in Mexico, but they put serious restrictions on that possibility.
If you think getting a US Green Card is hard, just try applying for the Mexican equivalent, and FM2 Visa.
Ha!
Nah - we just date the hot latina women (who, BTW, just LUV white guys with blue/green eyes and blond hair).
And we even marry them! And guess what - our kids get ALL the benefits of being Hispanic even though they are also blue eyed and blond hair (but seem to tan alot better.
Not true. I am half Hispanic, but lack a Hispanic surname. I have never benefited from AA or any other goodies, even though I have brown eyes and dark hair.
Me neither, and I am 50% Spanish.
+1. I’m actually guilty of being in favor of NPG.
Aren’t the Japanese lucky?
Let’s see your correlation numbers.
I suspect that the net zero immigration isn’t due entirely to the recession. There’s an element of saturation. All the jobs that “Americans won’t do” are already filled with non-Americans. Why hire any more?
During the bubble table service chain restaurants were popping up in my neck of the woods like mushrooms after a summer rain. Now … not so much. Between that and the lack of construction jobs I can see why Hay-soos packed his family and possessions into his “troka” and headed back to parts south of the border.
True. Up here, all of the Ag jobs need no more workers, but the collpase of housing construction plummeted prompted many of these workers to return home to Mexico. In the the highly Hispanic areas, the Western Union still does a brisk business with earnings $$$ being sent back home. But we’ve seen a huge drop off in the Hispanic market - either spending less or moving be south of the border.
OK, Ive finished my study of the planet Thomas Sowell.
Yes the dude is brilliant, but his fatal flaw is his equations never balance because he refuses to account for the “race particle”.
Ive looked at all his work and the most he does to deal with it is to claim the greed of the market will overcome the fear of race.
Thats sounds good, but it fails the experiments.
Sowells problem is he describes race as a rational particle instead of a wave of irrational insecurity.
He does this because its the only way he can make his equations work theoretically.
They look pretty, but they fail in the real world.
Sowell is getting old. He needs to account for the racial force even if it means coming up with a new branch of physics.
No need for shame; Its been done before.
Spook how does it fail the experiments? I have believed for years that the civil rights movement was successful when it was, because corporations wanted to move to the South and take advantage of cheap labor. My own family suffered when my father lost his union job in a woolen mill, when the mill closed in Vermont and went South. Doing away with Jim Crow which at its core was an unfair attempt of white workers to protect their wages, was very much in the greedy corporations plan to pay less than union wages. Sometimes people do bad things for good reasons and sometimes people do good things for bad reasons. I have always considered the corporate support for civil rights being the latter.
Hiring cheap labor doesn’t mean one isn’t racist or cares about “civil rights”.
That was my whole point. They claimed to be doing what they were doing for positive reasons but their hidden agenda was the cheap labor. Just like many today claim to care about the poverty in the developing countries while they move their production to places like China to exploit the cheap labor. Somehow Apple comes to mind.
Speaking of cheap labor maybe Rio can explain this, maybe Brazil does not have all the right policies after all.
Brazil’s economy slowed unexpectedly in the third quarter, new data suggests.
Latin America’s biggest country clocked just 0.6% growth in the three months to September versus the previous quarter, half the rate expected by analysts.
Businesses cut their investment by a further 2%, while consumer spending growth was a sluggish 0.9%.
The weak private-sector spending counteracted a big round of stimulus spending unleashed by the government, including tax cuts for businesses.
“It was horrible,” said Jankiel Santos, chief economist at BES Investimento in Sao Paulo. “The government is certainly going to be worried about this. The expectation is that they are going to come out with more stimulus measures.”
In September, the government cut its growth forecast for the year to 2% - a figure that was still seen as too optimistic by markets even before the latest data release.
Growth for 2012 now looks set to be closer to 1%, compared with 2.7% last year and 7.5% in 2010.
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2012-11-30 08:05:05
Spook how does it fail the experiments?
——-
The market greed overcoming race fear arguement fails on an individual basis all the time; which is why I doubt it works collectively when Im shown examples of such.
Thats some other mechanism.
I submit that every nonwhite person has experienced or will experience the phenomenon of a white person foregoing: money, sex,title, position…real value of some kind, in order to practice racism.
Thomas Sowell refuses to address this phenomenon even though he himself has experienced it.
He needs to address this phenomenon even if he just acknowledges its existence without working it into his theory.
“Its alright, its OK…” Thats the problem with academics, they can’t bring themselves to say 3 simple words: “I Don’t Know”
I don’t even know if the racial force is a bad thing? (except when everybody tries to use it)
The only thing I do know is that a force that powerful cannot be ignored because everyone who has tried to has failed; I know cause Im one of em.
Thomas Sowell has failed too.
O.K. tribalism is in our genes but haven’t nonwhite people also engaged in the same behavior of favoring their particular race over another. Honestly, wasn’t the last election a classic example of that? Moreover, the more someone is a minority in a society, isn’t the bond between the minority members stronger and the individual more likely to engage in the behavior and at a stronger level? The fact that 40% of whites could vote for Obama but only 1 or 2% of blacks could vote for Romney seems to support my view.
I’m sure many blacks voted for Obama because of his race. But a lot of Hispanics voted for him as well. Since Blacks and Hispanics don’t exactly get along, that wasn’t the reason they voted for him. More likely they overcame their own racism because the other guy was threatening to kick them in the nuts.
A majority of Asians also voted for Obama.
The fact that 40% of whites could vote for Obama
Don’t worry, Dan. Your tribe will get its day. 40% white votes has to be the lowest in history for a democratic presidential candidate. If the democrats continue with the identity politics and minorities grow at the current rate, soon whites will have plenty of reasons to vote their own tribes as well.
“I submit that every nonwhite person has experienced or will experience the phenomemon of a white person …”
(”white person” = me)
“… foregoing: money, sex, title, position … real value of some kind, in order to practice racism.”
Now tell me, Spook, just why would I do this?
If a white person gets shafted by another white person it becomes difficult to chalk it up to racism because both parties are white. So the white person - the shaftee - has to look a bit deeper to uncover what is the real reason for the shafting - and the list of reasons can be lengthly.
But if a non-white person gets shafted by a white person then the reason is a given, and this reason is racism.
Combo, did I mention you?
I know I should have clarified that I mean’t the white people who practice racism.
Also, My comments are specific to Thomas Sowell. I really liked the youtube clips of him in the 80s opening up with both barrels on the liberals; they had never seen a creature like that before. Those are classics.
Also, I think it would be constructive if everyone steps outside of their racial classification when we discuss race?
The “yea my team!” aspect retards the discussion.
I try to look at it like a Martian would see it (Jesus Christ what a buncha fcking retards…)
“Also, I think it would be constructive if everyone steps outside of their racial classification when we discuss race?”
Agree but tough (impossible?) to do; Too much bagage.
From both ends.
White guilt at one end, victim status at the other end.
And then there are those who profit from pitting one end against the other and keeping the game going.
Question: If eliminating racism, poverty, etc is a project, what are those employed working on the project to do for employment if the project is ever completed?
How powerful is the incentive for them to complete the project as compared to the incentive keeping the project alive?
“The market greed overcoming race fear arguement fails on an individual basis all the time; which is why I doubt it works collectively when Im shown examples of such.”
Based on how you worded your first post, he seems to be saying that in the end, the greed of the market *will* trump racism, not that it succeeds at it every day.
“Ive looked at all his work and the most he does to deal with it is to claim the greed of the market will overcome the fear of race.
Thats sounds good, but it fails the experiments.”
It is hard to tell at what point the experiments have run long enough to analyze results. But I doubt anyone who suggested it would have had much luck convincing many Americans back in 1960 that we would have a black president fifty years hence.
black president fifty years hence
We still don’t have a black president. Obama’s father came as a free man in this country and Obama’s upbrining is whiter than most whites. Descendents of slaves still have hard time getting a call returned for an entry level job.
“We still don’t have a black president.”
Toni Morrison
Clinton as the first black president
New Yorker, October 1998
BC is more black than BO.
I saw some articles that Harding was the first black president ever.
Descendents of slaves still have hard time getting a call returned for an entry level job…..
You not serious, are you?
Oh, maybe you are. Are you referring to those “ghetto boys” that walk around with their pants hanging below their butts, with hoodies for summertime outer-wear and hats turned around sideways, as a fashion statement.
Yea. They’re everywhere. They look real serious about finding a “JOB”. It’s really tough to do much work with one hand holding your pants up and the other on a cellphone.
If I was a business operator, I’d be dying to try and find a fine example of industriousness like that.
Get real. It’s racism, isn’t it? It couldn’t be that people who act like complete fools are not in demand by the business community.
There’s no doubt that no one wants to hire the hoodlum types. But I’ve met my share of educated blacks who tell me that racism is alive and well in the USA.
Racism is not the reason people can’t find jobs, but it’s used as an excuse for just about everything. Read: Paved with Good Intentions, if you can find a copy. Subtitled, the failure of race relations in America.
It is a collection of events that were claimed as the result of “racism” and the many, many changes in American society to counter them.
All have failed.
But, what is interesting is the opening few pages, surrounding a Black hip-hop or rap concert in Harlem, promoted by blacks, performed by blacks, and attended by blacks.
At the opening, a mob ensues and breaks down the entrance wherein a number of attendees were trampled. I believe one or 2 died. In the events that followed, Al Sharpton and the usual race-baiters claimed it was “racism” that caused this horrible incident. Huh?
There wasn’t a white or hispanic anywhere near the vicinity, nor part of the entire operation. But somehow, someway, other Blacks could say it was racism, and be taken seriously, even though No one but they themselves were responsible for the incident.
The book is filled with similar events and stories and the changes in police and fire dept testing, changes in school curriculum, changes in real estate rules and lending, etc. etc, etc. Net effect: Same problems.
But now, we have Obama in the Whitehouse. Proof that EEOC programs can get unqualified people into very high positions.
Descendents of slaves still have hard time getting a call returned for an entry level job.
——————-
And that begs the question, should blk people be waiting on people to give them jobs?
I don’t see no Amish people waitin around for no phone call?
Hundreds of years of slavary may have something to do with it. Not everyone reacts to a event the same way. Some blacks are willing to forget and forgive and have done wonderful things in life. Like creating jobs for other people. Many haven’t and may take another few hundred years. Just look at the palestanians and isrealis, they are still fighting the same war for centuries.
Well Spook, about creating jobs but getting away from just ablack angle, we have reports today about the highest unemployment in the country being in El Centro and
Yuma, I have never spent much time in either other than getting gas on my way to Coronado but they really are bad cities, El Centro seems to be even worse. The reason for the high unemployment is that they are two cities heavily populated by illegals. If you look at the Cuban immigrants, at least before Castro emptied his jails, they made their own jobs in Little Havana. When this country imports people it should at least make sure they are more like Cubans. However, I say we are full and unless the people are the cognitive elite of the world, we just don’t need anymore.
I don’t see no Amish people waitin around for no phone call?
No real Amish person has a phone to wait on. The ‘jack’ Amish keep their cell phones hidden under a hay bale out in the barn.
“But I doubt anyone who suggested it would have had much luck convincing many Americans back in 1960 that we would have a black president fifty years hence.”
Or that fifty years later, white people would pay good money for sporting events that feature more than one darkie per team.
fifty years….
Beg to differ. Fifty years ago the idea of a Black POTUS was very much on the minds of young school children, as was the idea of a woman POTUS. We were explicitly taught that if we children could grow up to create an American society where we all played on a level field, ANYONE could become President. (And then GWB proved us right.
In fact, I think that early and optimistic exposure in our schools and broader media helped bring about the reality.
Yo Spookie, thanks again for the tip on how to read online NY Times articles without subscribing (delete all of the url string after “html” where the question mark is).
well you know what they say, a thousand monkeys typing for a thousand years…
WSJ - Detroit on the Verge of Insolvency, Again:
“This city is back on the brink of insolvency, just months after signing an agreement with state officials designed to shore up its shaky finances.
Some city and state leaders believe Detroit has now reached a breaking point, where it must decide whether to accept a state-appointed emergency manager to run the government or file for bankruptcy to prevent a default on more than $8 billion in bonds.
For years, Detroit has borrowed millions to fund its operations, unable to find ways to boost revenues. Financial mismanagement stemming from political corruption, a hard-hit housing market and a massive loss in population — 25% of all city residents left from 2000 to 2010 — were all factors in its fiscal woes.”
See also:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfGLB8LO1aM
“Detroit on the Verge of Insolvency, Again:”
SHOCKER!
Yeah, the new idea is to dissolve the city altogether and merge it with the county. What could possibly go wrong?
I was talking to a couple the other day who live in the area, they just purchased a home down here, but the husband is still working there, he’s got another year or so until retirement. He told me that when he has to drive into Detroit on business, he sometimes has to run a red light or two to avoid stopping and possibly becoming a crime victim. He told me it’s really that bad.
He must not have gotten the memo from the Media-Academia-White-Liberal-Guilt-Industrial-Complex that that kind of behavior is Racist®.
“… he’s got another year or so until retirement.”
Retirement. From Detroit.
(shudder)
Is he, uh, any good at math?
“Is he, uh, any good at math?”
He’s retiring from some job in Michigan, outside of Detroit, but has to go to the city every so often on business. Some people still do business there.
Must be a pretty scary place.
Wow - no ones wants in a city run into the ground of 60 years of unbroken far left democrat rule???
But they passed EVERY liberal law and policy out there. The place should be a utopia!
And public unions STILL control Detroit.
I don’t get it. Detroit has EVERYTHING going for it.
They can win elections but they cannot govern. Their winning coalition must be held together with sufficient bribes from the public that taxpayers cannot afford.
France has moved from one of the supports for the EU, to the next basketcase all within a few months of the socialists winning, a similar story to the U.S.
Ever been to Berkeley?
All the time, I hope you are not calling it a well run town. Every year I go back it is a little worse. My GF grew up there in the 1960’s when it was a great city. We use to visit her step mother’s house on Forest not far from the college. A city is true decline and don’t even get me started about Oakland.
Berkeley is actually pretty awesome, I liked it even if its politics is too far left for me personally. If I had to choose between Albuquerque and Berkeley… yeah, I know what I’m picking.
Good Joe another reason to live in Albuquerque, if all the money I save on housing is not enough.
Isn’t it Bush’s fault that Detroit is in the shape it is in??
Note to AHansen:
Concerning your yesterdays comments to my comments about Obama being an EEOC appointee, and a fraud, as thus:
Barack Obama certainly was not ELECTED, not “appointed” President of the Harvard Law Review (by both his peers and his professors) because he was, as you so quaintly put it “a minority”. His writings of the time reflect an uncommonly agile mind and a hugely expansive (some might call it inspirational) spirit. In a hyper-competitive environment like Harvard Law School, no one gives away their claim to such an influential post out of “political correctness”.
I like that: His writings reflect….blah,blah.
Is that a comment from Charlie Rose while interviewing Professor Puff Daddy of Prevaricating Univerity??
I assume you must have found some of his profound writings. Please provide a post for the rest of us to read. I am dying to see what he wrote.
From all my research on the internet, in addition to the fact that ALL his college records are SEALED, so we don’t know what is grades were, that only a single article was ever accredited to him as part of the Harvard Law Review. That article penned anonymous, was credited later, concerning the ability of a fetus to sue it’s mother, some kind of furtherance of the idea of personhood being denied the unborn.
All of Obama’s writings are mostly fiction, while claiming to be about “him”, i.e. his TWO autobiographies with his “composite” friends and relations, meaning they really didn’t exist as real people, but might have existed, sort of like being born to a Kenyan goat herder and starting out as a poor Kenyan peasant to rise from nowhere to the Senate of the US. That Story worked well until the idea of running for President came in. Then the story was just a “typo”. He was really a native born American from Hawaii.
So, please, I like EVIDENCE as much as anybody. I want PROOF and Facts. Please provide a link to the scholarly articles published by Barack Obama, as we would all like to read them for ourselves.
Thankyou.
This would be most helpful.
Here is my own link to what we think we know about Obama:
http://theobamahustle.wordpress.com/tag/law-review/
I post an opening excerpt here:
How Obama had managed to become the president of the Harvard Law Review Without Publishing Anything Of His Own
On 10.25.09, In Where Are Obama’s Records, By Record Master
How Obama had managed to become the president of the Harvard Law Review Without Publishing Anything Of His Own.
Digital access to scholarship at Harvard
Enter obama’s name and you will find nothing. search for any article or any proof of scholarship of obama and you will find ZERO results
Harvard Law Review articles
In 1990, Obama beat out 18 other contenders to become the first black president of the Harvard Law Review, where he spent at least 50 hours a week editing submissions from judges, scholars and authors.
According to Politico, there were “eight dense volumes produced during his time in charge there – 2,083 pages in all.” No published writing from obama?
According to Politico, Obama’s name does not appear on any legal scholarships during his time at Harvard.
Why Didn’t Obama Publish anything in the law journal he edited?
Change in Selection System of The Harvard Law Review in the 1980′s.
Mr. Obama was elected after a meeting of the review’s 80 editors that convened Sunday and lasted until early this morning, a participant said.
Until the 1970’s the editors were picked on the basis of grades, and the president of the Law Review was the student with the highest academic rank. Among these were Elliot L. Richardson, the former Attorney General, and Irwin Griswold, a dean of the Harvard Law School and Solicitor General under Presidents Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard M. Nixon.
That system came under attack in the 1970’s and was replaced by a program in which about half the editors are chosen for their grades and the other half are chosen by fellow students after a special writing competition. The new system, disputed when it began, was meant to help insure that minority students became editors of The Law Review. ………………………………………………………………………………
Obama was a “minority student” He was chosen by fellow students through a “special writing competition”.
No “special writing competition” by the “minority student” obama has been published or released by Harvard that would explain or justify how obama was chosen by fellow students for his “writing skills”.
And regardless of all of the above, you get to enjoy FOUR MORE YEARS of it!
I will.
I gonna buy me some houses with the government back loans, take out huge home equity loan and then not pay one cent back.
And I will be a VICTIM. And have all my debts forgiven. And not even pay any taxes.
I joining the moochers.
Because only only fools work, save and live beneath their means.
That is NOT the obama way.
Even you need me you can call me on my obamaphone.
Because only only fools work, save and live beneath their means.
That is NOT the obama way.
You mean it’s not the American way.
I remember being laughed at 10 years ago for not flipping houses and being a worker bee. Even relatives mocked me.
Just out of curiosity…
How are these folks doing today?
I remember being laughed at 10 years ago for not flipping houses and being a worker bee. Even relatives mocked me.
Yes Colorado, tell some tales of these people who mocked you. Did they get owned by the downturn/crash?
tell some tales
Here’s a brief personal anecdote. In a ten year span, the squad’s cousin’s husband’s brother went from a video game playing stoner living on their couch with only a high school degree to become a mortgage broker in Cape Coral, FL, one of the bubbliest bubble markets with no economic fundamentals whatsoever.
We remember being in grad school then and actually living like a grad student should, and marvelling at the house, the cars, the boat, the girlfriend’s new fake t*ts, all acquired with his mortgage broker riches, and wondering what the f*ck we were doing in our sixth year of education beyond what this dude completed.
As could be easily guessed, he saved nothing from the fat years, and lost everything including the enhanced girlfriend. Today he is back living on the couch with my cousin and her husband in Fort Lauderdale, smoking pot and playing video games, and working some kind of 30K millionaire type Lucky Ducky job.
“and lost everything including the enhanced girlfriend”
But if she still has the “enhancements” she perhaps has moved on to a legitimately wealthy guy?
Yes Colorado, tell some tales of these people who mocked you. Did they get owned by the downturn/crash?
O mais oui! Many lost a wad.
But my point was that this is a “bipartisan” behavior. Some who mocked me fancied themselves as being very “conservative”. The “get rich quick” mindset is equal opportunity.
i can smell your jealousy from here.
“i can smell your jealousy from here.”
LOL! Your schadenfreude is palpable.
Well, finding the outstanding legal briefs and articles prepared and written by Obama will probably be like every other venture……..We need time to find out the “facts”.
Think of Fast and Furious. It was a Whitehouse fiasco, so now it’s been hidden under “executive privilege”.
And so with Benghazi, wherever Obama has his mitten-prints, will be expunged. WE are STILL looking for the “Facts”. We won’t get any. Just a cover story. So, where was Obama during the Benghazi attack on our consulate by Terrorists?
Where?
That should be an easy question to answer. They know his schedule. Where was he? In the situation room? NO? Out golfing?
The only thing we know for sure, is that no matter what he says or does (which is usually to blame others and then go on a “fact-finding mission” to route out the guilty), the PRESS will write stories that cover for him and distract the public whenever any scrutiny may be forthcoming…….IN a week or two, after the anger at Benghazi has been removed from recent memory, the budget will be the new distraction, and any questions will be “old news”.
“That’s old news”. How many times have we heard that from “responsible journalists”. No questions will be answered. A low-level bureaucrat will be blamed and we will get assurances that “steps have been taken to assure it never happens again”. yea. that’s it.
Like more and more regulations and an even bigger government…
“steps have been taken to assure it never happens again”. yea. that’s it.
Bring back Enron!!
Ernon - it actually FAILED and went bankrupt!!!
And its owners, CEO and managers went to jail!!!
Why has that NOT happened under four years of the obama administration???
For firms that have lost much more money?
And from Enron we got the Sarbanes–Oxley Act
More and more regulation and bigger and bigger government.
Tell me - how did Sarbanes–Oxley Act STOP ANYTHING???
The typical liberal answer to this question is that we need even more regulations and even bigger government…
And from Enron we got the Sarbanes–Oxley Act
More and more regulation and bigger and bigger government.
SarbOx stipulates jail terms for falsifying financial statements. Sounds like a great idea to me.
Enron reamed California for years!
I guess we should leave the lead in the paint, let the market take care of things. dead people cant buy paint, sooner of later lead paint co’s close….duh!
people wont cheat, just leave them alone.
+1 Winners win!
As a libertarian, i cant complain, the market has spoken.
“According to Politico, there were “eight dense volumes produced during his time in charge there – 2,083 pages in all.” No published writing from obama?
According to Politico, Obama’s name does not appear on any legal scholarships during his time at Harvard.
Why Didn’t Obama Publish anything in the law journal he edited?”
Of course Obama’s name doesn’t appear on any articles published in the Harvard Law Review. Staffers on law reviews sometimes (only sometimes) publish “notes” which are shorter articles published without a byline. That is how law reviews work.
Law has the oddest publishing schema of any academic discipline in the United States. Pretty much all of the scholarly journals are run by students who are still in law school. I think there might be a few specialty journals (there is a tax law one in Florida) that are run by students in masters degree programs, but that is it. There was a push a decade or so ago to try to start a few journals that weren’t run by students because the professors who write the articles (and have to get them published for prestige, promotions and tenure) were sick of dealing with a bunch of youngsters, but as far as I know it failed.
Harvard is basically the most prestigious law review in the country. They can limit their articles to the most ground breaking scholarship, the most well known scholars, the best of all there is. There are only a few articles per edition - 2 or 3 would be common. 4 or 5 would be a lot. They are at least dozens of pages each. Can be longer. Hundreds of citations in each article. No student editor has the time to write an article like that while working on the journal and taking a full course load. None.
Students in their first year on law review are working doing the basic drudge work of getting the chosen articles out the door. Every single citation has to be looked up and confirmed. Not only do they have to make sure directly quoted language is correct, they have to make sure that cited cases, administrative rulings and articles actually support the statements they are cited under. You could spend 10 minutes confirming an easy citation. The next one could take 30 hours.
During this year of drugery (minimum number of required hours a week), students on law review try to write a “note.” It is shorter than an article. It still has to be scholarship on a topic that hasn’t been written about previously. A lot of people never finish them or never even get a topic approved. If they are finished and accepted for publication (writing it doesn’t mean your journal will publish it for reasons varying from the editors deciding it is boring to not having enough staff to cite check and get it publication ready - articles always come before notes), then they are published WITHOUT the author’s name. Always. Notes are not attributed. You wrote it before you were an attorney. Not allowed to be published with the real legal scholars no matter how worthy it is.
Not everyone who is on staff during the first year of law review (second year of law school) gets a title like President or Articles Editor or whatever during the second year of law review (third year of law school). People who don’t get that are still required to the grunt work editing stuff that they did before. The ones who do get other positions are the leaders of the journal. They run the staff, deal with publishing issues (like subscriptions and the printers), choose articles for publication from hundreds (or thousands) of submissions, possibly solicit articles from particular scholars on a theme if they hope to have an issue devoted to that theme, review the work of the newbies, train the newbies, etc. People who are in this group will be much, much less likely to finish their notes. They are running a scholarly journal and interviewing for jobs (judicial clerships or others) and taking a full course load all at the same time.
There isn’t anything about the President not having published a law review article under his name as the President of Harvard Law Review that is even the slightest bit odd. If he had, it would probably have been the first time it had happened since the current system of legal scholarship publications has been established. Now, there may be a few schools out there that do publish student notes with names. It is the sort of thing that a much less prestigious journal might do to try to get people to put in the absurd number of hours a week it takes to make it work. But not at Harvard. Not at the next most prestigious 50 or 60 law reviews either. The fact that he actually got a note published (according to your sources) is stunningly impressive.
What we learned on the Drudge Report:
Obama is a communist.
Obama wasn’t born in USA.
Obama eats dog meat.
Obama wasn’t a student at Columbia.
Obama wants to take your guns away.
Obama wants to implement Sharia law in USA.
Obama unfairly taxes the Producers.
Obama wastes money on failed green energy companies.
Obama hates white people.
So, what you are saying is there are NO published documents by Obama, wherein AHansen can point to and claim he should brilliant legal scholarship.
So, it is, as I suspected, just a claim by the left, with no basis.
Perhaps that is why many of us would like to see his college grades and transcripts.
I’ve heard many stories, perhaps unfounded, but the PROOF is right there in the records.
Why can’t we see them? If he’s such a genius, he must have been at the top of his class, unlike Bush, who was a “c” student.
And, no, nothing was accredited to Him. The post that the whitehouse said he “took credit for” was written by “anonymous”. The tale was that it was Obama’s style, and therefore he must have written it. I’ve yet to see anything Obama has penned, other than his fictional life story-books. For such a brilliant legal mind, I was thinking there would be reams of papers and legal documents. You’d expect all the Obama worshippers would be posting all over the internet all his great works and suggesting an Opus Magnus of legal renderings. I guess not.
So, making comments about his towering mental acuity is, quite simply, pure propaganda. There is no evidence to support it by way of actual legal arguments that can be perused by the common people to judge for ourselves his level of reasoned logic. Too Bad.
I guess for the Cult of Obama, the Mystique is all the more intriguing.
Just because the note wasn’t published under his name doesn’t mean you don’t know who wrote it. The authors of the notes are known; they just aren’t listed in the publication and therefore can’t be found by searching on databases of legal journals.
I don’t know if he wrote and published articles while he was an attorney. If anyone can give me a title or a citation, of any of his published work, I can try to take a look at it.
I haven’t read his books either, but my understanding is that he wrote them himself.
He was truly the communislamian candidate. He had enough swagger, articulation cool to convince the brain dead vote for him. You would have to be brain dead to vote for someone based on a mantra of hope and change, lowering the sea levels and bringing peace to the world.
Now after being given a second term by dreadlock and knit cap wearing losers, blacks, hispanics and egg head self loathing guilty white progressives - the real fundamental changing of america will be attempted. Good luck out there…stock up on TP and soup.
“You would have to be brain dead to vote for someone based on a mantra of hope and change, lowering the sea levels and bringing peace to the world. “
Unless you found McCain/Palin unpalatable. 2008 was a choice election at a time of crisis. McCain declared during that campaign that he was a lightweight on economics. He stated that he expected us to be in Iraq for 100 years. Palin was unqualified. And that is before you get to policy issues.
If a campaign is a test of leadership, then both McCain and Romney failed and Obama passed.
I agree with you about McCain and Palin, however I will always vote against a communist who wants to “fundamentally change america”. McCain with all of his issues was not a radical ideologue with nefarious intentions to subvert the american way of life forever. By the way, I live in Arizona and always voted for the libertarian against McCain, the 2008 election was the first time I pulled the lever for him.
Polly nailed this. If a law student manages to get anything published while a student, it is usually at a very low ranked journal and it is usually a Note. The top journals (not just the Ivies, but more like any top 50 journal) choose the best articles from law professors, judges, or related academics (e.g. Law & Economics, Behavioral Economics, Public Policy, etc). Students handle all the editing, cite checking, and selection of articles. Just to get onto a law review, a person has to pre-qualify by having good grades. From there, you compete for a spot on law review, with grades and writing ability weighted differently for each journal. There is usually a cite checking competition as well–you are handed an unpublished law review article that has not been cite checked and is known to need hundreds of edits. You have a finite period (over a weekend, say) to mark all the edits and suggest changes.
I only know one law student who had anything more than a Note published–he basically spammed his law review article submissions to lower-ranked journals. Even in that case, the articles were not published until he had graduated and was clerking for a U.S. District Court judge.
Getting published in a top law review requires a few things students don’t have– a) A history of publishing and doing unique research. Even if your writing is great, law reviews are still biased in favor of people with a track record. Everyone wants to publish, say, Eugene Volokh or Cass Sunstein. b) Lots of time to prep and submit articles to many law reviews, which all have their own due dates and rules about length, format, etc. c) Years of writing and re-writing to tweak and re-work potential articles and make changes suggested by colleages. This is often done when professors attend conferences or do a semester as a visiting professor at a school with a particularly strong focus. d) It really helps to have a law student assist you with the research. Law professors have research assistants, law students do not. e) Finally, law professors do not have to worry about grades, law students do. And for people on law review, they have to worry about grades plus their law review duties–a double burden.
Basically Dio has no idea what he’s talking about, as usual.
Lawrence Lessig is my favorite scholarly legal writer.
And journals might possibly have things like a cite checking component of the process of getting on the staff now, but they sure as heck didn’t when the president was in law school. That was my era. It was mostly grades. There was a writing competition that was weighted a lot less than the grades were. This all happened in the spring after first year grades were out. One or two people might have been allowed to “write on” in the fall, but that was highly unusual. Most years nobody pulled it off.
Polly — In any case, the criteria for making law review are heavily skewed towards the grades. As you say, “write on” and cite checking are only a fraction. They are mostly there to ensure that the people applying for law review really want to be on law review. I know several people who could’ve done law review or a law journal but chose not to do so. Or at least they chose not to participate in the competition.
The flip side is, I know extremely bright people who, for whatever reason, got very mediocre law school grades but became very good lawyers. That said, to make it onto law review you really do need to have at least a baseline of intelligence that puts you towards the top of your class. There’s too much info in 1L and writing long essay answers in a compressed time period for anonymous grading strongly favors intelligence over mere hard work.
Dio,
NO modern POTUS’s school records, medical records, mortgage and title records, etc. are published during their presidency –if ever– for reasons discussed here on several occasions. The privacy and security issues raised concern the safety of the friends, physicians, professors, fellow students, clerks and officers, et al they may have interacted with as much as they are for POTUS and family.
You will not find GW Bush’s Master’s Thesis or arrest records, Bill Clinton’s final history exam or semen analysis, or Ronnie Reagan’s psychiatrist reports or life guard certification either. This is not some huge conspiracy, it is standard practice. Please get over it.
Please get over it.
Yeah, but all those other Presidents were Real Americans who were born in USA.
Obama was not born in USA. Obama is not Real American.
I love it! Too bad we cant bottle the neo-con anger!
Obama, our fiscally conservative leader!!!
You can say what you want about Obama. But even if it turns out he lied about all his acomplishments, background….
He did a good job of faking it?
You gotta give him credit for that?
How many of us could pull something like this off?
Its spectacular if you ask me.
Same thing with the Apollo moon landings.
Don’t hate the player, hate the game.
It is impossible to fake what he has done. He did it at Harvard F-ing Law School. There is no such thing as a conspiracy of silence at a school like that with respect to someone’s ability to do the work. There are always plenty of people around who could benefit from and figure out a way to prove if a prominent figure who went to school with them was faking it.
We used to talk about it all the time. In law school you have to remember that all the professors and the administration were lawyers. And all your classmates were about to be lawyers. You can’t fake it. You can’t dazzle anyone with b-s for more than a minute or two.
My class had almost 350 students in it. One person managed to fake his way through when he was really pretty useless at legal analysis. One. Some were more brilliant than others, but only one person was actually bad at it.
You really can’t fake it and get good grades on anonymously graded exams. And the law review cite checking and writing competitions are also anonymous. You submit everything with a randomly-generated number. Then, as a final check, as you mention–the class ranks and the law review boards get posted and examined/re-examined by an army of past and future lawyers. Sorry, not much room for faking. You can say someone was a jerk and “doesn’t serve” to be Coif/Summa, but you can’t argue whether they are intelligent.
You’re ruining his narrative, guys. Knock it off with the facts, wouldja?
Darn those….
What your entire arguments here assume is that Obama got NO EEOC consideration. He WAS the dummy in the Class, but he was BLACK.. Go look at photos of his graduating class. HE is the ONLY black man. Yes, the only one.
What does that tell you?
Well, to you, it says he is brilliant. Me, it says he was an Outreach student. Harvard’s attempt to “diversify” its student body.
You don’t fail bad EEOC students and you DO accept substandard students.
As for your claims that ALL THE RECORDS get sealed and no one has to reveal anything and it’s standard procedure for everyone, let’s talk about George Bush’s National Guard service.
Do you remember that?
I am sure you do. I came up in 2000 and again in 2004.
2004 resulted in hundreds of records released and months of investigations and more records and a proctological exam.
Had BUSH been a Democrat, perhaps the PRESS would have taken the same tack as with Obama this past year>>>>>THAT”S ALL OLD NEWS. NOthing to report.
Obama is AN EEOC Appointee in Education. The University system is RIFE with EEOC “outreach”, more than any sector of American life, aside from government employment.
If you are a “minority”, the same rules DO NOT Apply.
You get jobs that whites and other minorities don’t get with superior test scores and qualifying criteria. This battle has been ongoing for more than 30 years. “Diversity” is More important than performance at almost every university in America, including Harvard.
Obama is the diversity.
Even the very white Elizabeth Warren was trotted out to Prove “diversity” after she claim to be a “native America”.
Yea, that was a stretch.
“Go look at photos of his graduating class. HE is the ONLY black man. Yes, the only one. What does that tell you?”
Obviously his brilliance comes from his white side.
I am convinced that nothing will convince you, Diogenes.
And I suspect that Obama knows that it is a losing proposition to publish his transcripts. If he got good grades, his detractors will take it as proof that he is an elitist or that someone gave him better grades than he deserved.
Look what happened when Hawaii published his birth certificate. Those who were determined to believe that he is not an American refused to accept that the birth certificate was authentic.
I would expect Trump to be dissatisfied with anything produced by Harvard.
You are grasping at straws. And I suspect the EEOC narrative is something you tell yourself to justify some lack of success in your life. Perhaps some black man beat you out for some job you wanted and you chose to believe it was due to affirmative action instead of some deficit on your part. And perhaps the deficit was attitude.
Early in my career, women had to be twice as good to get any recognition, let alone pay equal to their contribution. Today, I have to compete against tech workers in China and India. Every day, I have to prove that I am worth more to my employer than those folks. I have to find a niche that they can’t occupy. And having a positive, can-do, willing attitude makes me more attractive as an employee and co-worker.
“You get jobs that whites and other minorities don’t get with superior test scores and qualifying criteria. This battle has been ongoing for more than 30 years. “Diversity” is More important than performance at almost every university in America, including Harvard.”
Yes, but only until the whites become a minority, they you will see those laws repealed within two years. Can’t have whitey using laws created to punish the oppressor. I look forward to watching the egg head self loathing guilty white progressives figure that one out
I just look at his accomplishments. Facts are always better than “my gut says” he is a Muslim.
neo-cons destroyed the GOP. think IKE next time.
The GOP can’t actually move to the middle anymore. The democrats are already there. Nixon created the EPA. Obamacare started out as a proposal by The Heritage Foundation. The middle-of-the-road republican ideas have been absorbed by the other party.
And you think this will not change in future?
It would be nice to have a viable Republican Party again.
I don’t know how it was back in Obama’s HLS days, but as of a few yrs ago, US law schools assign you a new code each semester around finals time. A random string of, say, 8-10 numbers. You write this onto your exam on the cover or just inside the cover. Every semester, a new set of numbers, which are matched to a different set of numbers to someone in the registrar’s office. The papers are graded and passed to the registrar, then matched up to the second set of numbers. Finally the grades are posted by someone who can match that second set to actual names.
And the penalty for telling anyone your exam number (a friend, a professor) is expulsion if it ever comes out. I’m assuming HLS used a similar system even back in the 80s–as polly says, it’s a competitive place full of lawyers.
For law review competition purposes, it was a whole different set of numbers again. And competing for law review is such a burdensome thing, the idea that someone would spend 15 hrs/day over a weekend in the spring/early summer to write an entry for someone else… it is absurd. If Obama pulled this off, I would think more of him, not less of him. Because cheating a system like this and keeping everyone quiet for 20 yrs–that is amazing stuff.
NY Times graphic of taxes paid by different income ranges from 1980 to 2010:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/11/30/us/tax-burden.html
Note that the 1%ers have made out rather well since 1980 at the expense of Lucky Ducky.
Did you even read the article?
“For households earning less than $25,000, the tax rate in recent years has been negative because the expansion of government payments like the earned income tax credit exceeded the amount of taxes paid.”
“Affluent households are earning more — and paying a larger share of taxes.”
From the related NY Times article - Compaints Aside, Most Face Lower Tax Burden Than in 1980:
“A household making $350,000 in 2010, roughly the cutoff for the top 1 percent, on average paid 42.1 percent of its income in taxes, compared with 49 percent for a household with the same inflation-adjusted income in 1980 — a savings of about $24,100.
A household making $22,000 in 2010 — roughly the federal poverty line for a family of four — on average paid 19.4 percent in taxes, compared with 20.2 percent, saving $200.”
You are not part of the 1% so why are you defending them?
Probably because he believes that someday he will join them.
Super lotto players vote GOP! doh!
“Affluent households are earning more — and paying a larger share of taxes.”
Erm…isn’t that called math?
Did you read the graphs you posted?
I see a trend line Across the board in overall reductions for everyone, not the 1%.
Aside from the “headline story” over each graph, which often contradicts the graph itself, it shows that the upper level incomes bear the brunt of taxes.
I took a line across the top end of the taxes graph in 1980 and extended another at all the taxes by bracket in the 2010. It shows and ACross THE board reduction. The caption implies the rich got a big boost over everyone else, as your post implies.
The figures don’t show that.
Say what? The graph CLEARLY shows the upper income getting bigger reductions.
No matter what fantasy world you live in, 9 is still greater than 1.
Typo: “7″ is greater than 1.
Something to think about before you buy a house in heavily unionized state…
—————————————–
Just How Potent Are Teacher Unions? Pretty potent, as a rule, though it varies state by state.
National Review | 11/30/2012 | Chester E. Finn Jr. & Amber Winkler
Hostess is doing what other private-sector organizations (such as the auto, airline, and steel industries) have done in response to fiscally unsustainable contracts with — or contract demands from — their unions: either throw in the towel and quit altogether, or use drastic measures such as bankruptcy proceedings to reboot the terms (and costs) of employment.
Private-sector firms can do things like that. But what happens when one’s core business is educating 55 million young Americans via the public schools? They have unions, too, unions that typically make demands that are as damaging to educational quality and affordability as those of their private-sector counterparts. But public-sector endeavors can’t just shut down — or declare bankruptcy.
Education today employs more unionized staff than any other industry, public or private. Between them, the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) have some 4.6 million members, a combination of active teachers and other public-school employees, college faculty and staff, retirees, and students. (Meanwhile, membership rates in private-sector unions continue to fall, from 37 percent in 1952 to 6 percent in 2011.)
Resources do matter. Unions in states where collective bargaining is mandatory collect an average of $581 annually per teacher, versus $296 in states where bargaining is permitted but not obligatory. On the one hand, that big gap isn’t surprising, inasmuch as mandatory-bargaining states have more unionized, dues-paying teachers. But union coffers are also fattened by state laws allowing agency fees. In those jurisdictions, the unions harvest an average of $650 per teacher. In states that ban agency fees, that number falls to $405. In other words, the fiscal advantage that unions enjoy in mandatory-bargaining states nearly vanishes if they cannot collect fees from non-members.
That’s why California unions fought so hard — and successfully — this fall to defeat Proposition 32, which would have banned union contributions to state and local candidates as well as automatic deductions from wages for political purposes. Our study found that 18 of the 20 weakest unions are located in states that restrict their revenues by forbidding either the collection of agency fees from non-members or automatic dues collection from members. The message for those who want to curb union power is clear: Focus on “paycheck protection” measures as much as on the right of teachers to bargain collectively.
Are you trying to get me riled up today, 2banana.
We get riled up every day. After taking our blood pressure meds and decaf coffee, we read the Drudge Report to learn of all the countless ways that Obama is scheming to destroy USA.
Take America Back!
LOL. If that’s the case, you’ll probably live longer if you just stop reading the Drudge Report…
@ NE’er … Perhaps being a faux-bootstrapper has killed your ability to detect sarcasm? You really think goon was being serious? LOL
Perhaps being a faux-bootstrapper has killed your ability to detect sarcasm?
Just playing along with the goon there Mr. Smith.
BTW, from the number of disparaging posts regarding “boot-strapping”, it’s obvious that you’re externalizing your own inadequacies. How’s that dead-end job working out for you? You could always try the lottery, I hear the Powerball jackpot was pretty high…
The dead end job where I’m a 2%er?
It’s terrible.
Additionally, I do not disparage true boot strapping. I am laughing at someone who supports the oligarchs because he envisions himself as a “bootstrapper” and “job creator” despite being a wage-earning employee of someone else and tinkering with some small-time app that will never make real money. And being middle aged with kids but still buying into this delusion. That, to me, is sad.
Go Romney!
Who’s got a more boring job, Alex? A freaking computer programmer or a lying lawyer?
A person who claims to an associate at a major law firm but has time to monitor this board closely and is dismissive of tens of thousands of dollars. Despite major firms usually working their associates to death. Who also seems to be quite concerned with illegals.
Of course, we also have another leftist who can buy a house in the bay area with cash at anytime. Quite interesting people we have on this board.
I am laughing at someone who supports the oligarchs because he envisions himself as a “bootstrapper” and “job creator” despite being a wage-earning employee of someone else and tinkering with some small-time app that will never make real money.
And that my friend is where the irony lies… the supposed 2%er who, if he is really an attorney, can’t be bothered to look up the definition of “bootstrapping” to support his case against me.
Google “definition of bootstrapping”. See what the top result is. Here, let me help: Start up (an enterprise), esp. one based on the Internet, with minimal resources.
You make a terrible attorney if you can’t come up with a better argument than that… and being in the 2%, to quote Frank Costello in The Departed “it don’t add inches to your [Richard]“.
Ah yes, we all know lawyers run on hampster wheels all day. Maybe in the movies? Right now I have at least 2 hrs a day where I’m doing little to nothing because I’m waiting for someone to get back to me. I don’t even know why I’m explaining this to the same type of people who think that it’s possible that Obama scammed the HLS grading and/or law review process. LOL!
With that being said, we’re in a bit of a slow season now for my department, partly because of the fiscal cliff. Think back a few months, did you ever see me post during the workday? Very rare. This has been a fairly new phenomenon over the last month because the fiscal yr for the US gov’t ended and there’s a lot of uncertainty for clients right now.
Someone else on the blog a few weeks ago took a stereotypical view of lawyers–something to the effect that lawyers need to be unemotional or purely logical. This is folly as well; most of the good lawyers I know have fairly strong political reviews and are quite gregarious. David Boies is probably the best lawyer I’ve seen in action; the man is anything but timid or robotic.
Auto….airline…..steel industries
All of whom still suck eggs, even after throwing all of the union-types under the bus.
Makes me think that maybe their problems weren’t caused by union contracts.
Boom = teachers are idiots
Bust = teachers are greedy
BTW, some of the smartest mofos I’ve met work in K-12 education. They chose to “drop out,” so to speak.
If the pay were better, I would be sorely tempted.
I know this is a delicate matter and I hope I do not offend anyone in bringing this up. This is the only blog I watch and certainly have learned a lot from it.
I contribute to Ben’s blog once annually and I would like to know what the right amount is. Also, I think I tend to contribute about Feb.
Whenever I have asked Ben he simply says “whatever you feel comfortable with” - but that is the way a gentleman always talks.
I would like to know what should be given. I contributed $100 Canadian last Feb. What is the correct amount ?
Should the regulars contribute in December (sort of as a Christmas)?
Is there any way that I could send him a company christmas “turkey” (this year a voucher for one)?
Your ideas would be very much appreciated.
Profit is not a four letter word. Loss is. I want to make sure that Ben is able to continue his service - and from one of his recent blogs his “loss” worried me.
Patrick,
It not delicate. When the costs get ahead of me I’ve asked for donations. The stuff I pay out of pocket is for servers and wireless access so I can moderate/post when I’m not at home. It’s not so big an amount that the typical contributions or ad revenue don’t cover it. The reason I can’t do this full time anymore is the ad revenue got slashed a few years ago. I appreciate what the ad service does for little sites like this and they made the decision they had to make I guess.
Overall I do this because I enjoy it. I made that comment a while back because a poster said I was failing at my ‘job’ to moderate, and I just wanted to make the point that this isn’t a paying job. I’ll keep doing this until I can’t or you guys get sick of it and there’s no point any more. I appreciate your concern.
where are the ads? I used to click on one a day to help out.
Maybe you can run ads for flowers! they pay well! Or Mesothelioma.
I have to admit, the google cookie tracking (whatever it does), makes me much more likely to click on an ad. I found some nice light fixtures that way.
For those of you who think there has been ANY cutting of spending in Europe.
And the same agruments that will be used by obama.
———————
Guest Post: The Myth Of Austerity
http://www.zerohedge.com
Many politicians and commentators such as Paul Krugman claim that Europe’s problem is austerity, i.e., there is insufficient government spending. The common argument goes like this: Due to a reduction of government spending, there is insufficient demand in the economy leading to unemployment. The unemployment makes things even worse as aggregate demand falls even more, causing a fall in government revenues and an increase in government deficits. European governments pressured by Germany (which did not learn from the supposedly fateful policies of Chancellor Heinrich Brüning) then reduce government spending even further, lowering demand by laying off public employees and cutting back on government transfers. This reduces demand even more in a never ending downward spiral of misery. What can be done to break out of the spiral? The answer given by commentators is simply to end austerity, boost government spending and aggregate demand. Paul Krugman even argues in favor for a preparation against an alien invasion, which would induce government to spend more. So the story goes. But is it true?
Imagine that a person you know spends 12 percent more in 2008 than her income, spends 31 percent more than her income the next year, spends 25 percent more than her income in 2010, and 26 percent more than her income in 2011. Would you regard this person as austere? And would you regard this behavior as sustainable? This is what the Spanish government has done. It shows itself incapable of changing this course. Perversely, this “austerity” is then made responsible for a shrinking Spanish economy and high unemployment.
It’s Bush’s fault.
I agree.
You cant cut taxes and increase spending.
But Reagan started it.
The congress and senate also participated.
Should read house and senate.
I blame Truman and the Marshall Plan. We should have just let Europe go back to the dark ages after WWII…
Of course, then the Soviet Union would have taken advantage of the power vacuum left by our absence and Europe would have become a socialist paradise… oh, wait. Never mind.
the Soviet Union would have taken advantage of the power vacuum left by our absence and Europe would have become a socialist paradise… oh, wait. Never mind.
Turns out those liberals were pretty smart. But they had to argue against the exact same knuckleheadedness we liberals argue against today. Like those who thought the Marshall Plan was socialism, and that any such government intervention was doomed to failure.
from another board..
—-
The democrats probably thought even their constituancy would revolt over that press to attack age old popular deductions.
This isn’t a budget negotiation. It’s an attempt by Obama to steal the 2014 election. He needs control to achieve his final solution of national communism. You may not believe me on that, but anyone knowledgeable does including Betrayus.
Now limiting deductions would be the demoncrats concession to keeping rates about the same, for 2013.
This is just posturing for the media bull horn.
Next year of course the government will need more money……
The ‘crats are seeking a one party political structure somewhat down the lines of the Soviet politburo from which they’ll be able to convert the US into a communist nation. The wealthy who were pro Obama think they can control him, but they’re wrong. He intends to confiscate all their wealth, and all yours too. Having money won’t be allowed. You’ll be required to request things via allocation cards. What anyone can consume will be strictly controlled.
“The ‘crats are seeking a one party political structure somewhat down the lines of the Soviet politburo from which they’ll be able to convert the US into a communist nation.”
Wow, talk about “progressive socialism”!
it’s always been their plan. until the last election, i never thought they could really pull it off. the communist party of the USA celebrated when obama won.
Have faith, all of those radical tactics can be used against them in the future. We also have the added bonus of superior IQ’s. We were the first country to give people true freedom, the world will never see this kind of freedom again. Many tens of millions of people in this country will not go down without a fight.
Nick, i admire your optimism. and i know we won’t go down without a fight, but i think it’s hopeless in the end. there are just too many people that don’t know how an economy really works. they can be lied to, deceived with impossible promises.
yes, communism will fail as it always does. but the cost of that failure is very high.
it’s sad that even most of the so-called ‘conservatives’ like romney, don’t truly believe in free markets like they claim they do. there is however, always a chance that they might learn. that’s what we have to hope for. that people will learn before it’s too late.
I agree with you in most respects, there has to be a ground up movement to restore liberty. We should be encouraged by the large number of young folks who rallied around Ron Paul, that tells me we have not lost everyone.
Communism is a very dark place for any country, I really do not see a day when it will be successfully implemented in the United States. People are waking up to the truth and beginning to figure out they have been suckered by years of incrementalism perpetrated by the global progressives.
you know that i hope you’re right, Nick.
We already have communism, but we call them “corporations”.
We already have communism, but we call them “corporations”.
only if government takes them over.
or we let them stay in private hands and tax the hell out of them, and we’ll have fascism instead.
“The ‘crats are seeking a one party political structure “
Like Rove’s permanent Republican majority?
U.S. birthrate plummets to its lowest level since 1920
By Tara Bahrampour, Published: November 29, 2012
Washington Post
The U.S. birthrate — 63.2 births per 1,000 women of childbearing age — has fallen to a little more than half of its peak, which was in 1957. The rate among foreign-born women, who have tended to have bigger families, has also been declining in recent decades, although more slowly, according to the report.
The average number of children a U.S. woman is predicted to have in her lifetime is 1.9, slightly less than the 2.1 children required to maintain current population levels.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/us-birth-rate-plummets-to-its-lowest-since-1920/2012/11/29/ee7e8d16-3a3f-11e2-b01f-5f55b193f58f_story.html
Not housing
AWESOME
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn22545-dna-imaged-with-electron-microscope-for-the-first-time.html
NOT AWESOME
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/50032789/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/dispersant-makes-oil-spills-times-more-toxic/#.ULlj2IXJ47A
This is an interesting analysis.
http://davetroy.com/posts/the-real-republican-adversary-population-density
“Quite an achievement given the amount of communists posting here.”
At the risk of being ‘outed’ as a communist, NOT EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH YOU IS A COMMUNIST, NICK!