Comments for Obama seeks GOP help on economy; McConnell hopeful »
Posted By STONERS 10 months, 1 week ago in Political NewsPresident Barack Obama is making good on his promise to hear from Republicans as he pushes for swift passage and bipartisan backing of his massive $825 billion plan intended to jolt the country out of recession.
Read Full Story at news.yahoo.com »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 21
-
100%
STONERS10 months, 1 week ago
-
-
100%
sinophil4910 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Patriot - Yeah! Obama has to learn from Bush how to completely ignore the opposition and not even bother meeting with them. Bush knows how to stomp on the opposition and show them what he really thinks of them (if he even thinks of them). In Bush's world view, there is only one point of view - HIS. Rookie Obama is just wasting his time playing nice w/ the Republicans
Reply-
17%
Hhussk10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually Bush listen to Ted Kennedy and joined with him to create the No Child Left Behind program. You can see how that worked out.
Reply
Democrats have controlled Congress for over two years now. Congress controls our money. How much longer are you going to let Democrats ruin our economy?-
100%
vor10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Like most of your fellow cons you don't understand the basic construct of our system. Power does not exist without the veto. Bush held that power (and the Dems had no ability to override) for 8 solid years.
Reply
Amazing that you can then blame the Democrats "for ruining our economy"! Again, as with your fellow cons you have a difficult time accepting responsibility. You voted for this man who possessed no true leadership skills. He floundered and eventually failed. You simply cannot accept that fact. -
100%
ybdogsct10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
HHUSSK:
Reply
"Democrats have controlled Congress for over two years now. Congress controls our money. How much longer are you going to let Democrats ruin our economy?"
The underpinnings of the economic collapse were initiated more than 2 years ago. The public is no longer buying your neocon lies.
No wonder the public booted your ilk out of power in both the White House and the Capitol.
LOL.
PRIOR TO ITS COLLAPSE COLLAPSE, FREDDIE MAC KILLS CHUCK HAGEL'S REGULATORY LEGISLATION LARGELY BY LOBBYING REPUBLICANS
http://www.propeller.com/story/2008/12/07/how-fred...
"Freddie Mac thwarted efforts to bring a tough regulatory bill sponsored by Senator Chuck Hagel by secretly paying a Republican consulting firm, Washington-based DCI Group, $2 million to kill Hagel's legislation. The covert lobbying campaign targeted Republican senators in 2005-06. According to the newly obtained records, DCI's deployment was part of a broader campaign that targeted mainly Republicans on Capitol Hill. The internal Freddie Mac documents show that 17 of the lobbying firms and consultants paid in 2006 were specifically directed to focus on Republicans and four on Democrats."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27266607/
"Unknown to the senators, DCI was undermining support for the bill in a campaign targeting 17 Republican senators in 13 states, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press. The states and the senators targeted changed over time, but always stayed on the Republican side.
Before 2004, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were Democratic strongholds. After 2004, Republicans ran their political operations. McLoughlin, who joined Freddie Mac in 2004 as chief of staff, has given $32,250 to Republican candidates over the years, including $2,800 to McCain, and has given none to Democrats."
THE DCI LOBBYIST GROUP USED BY FREDDIE MAC TO LOBBY REPUBLICANS WAS HEADED BY DOUG GOODYEAR, JOHN MCCAIN'S SELECTION FOR GOP CONVENTION CHAIR
http://www.newsweek.com/id/136321
"Doug Goodyear, McCain's selection for GOP Convention Chair, is CEO of DCI Group, which earned $3 million lobbying for ExxonMobil and GM.
DCI was paid $348,000 to represent Burma's military junta, which was condemned by the State Dept. for its human-rights record and remains in power today. His firm created a PR campaign to burnish the junta's image, denouncing 'falsehoods' by the Bush administration that the regime engaged in rape and other abuses.
Goodyear's firm also pioneered 527 groups, precisely the kind of operations that McCain, in his battle for campaign-finance reform, has denounced.
Ironically, Goodyear was chosen for the post after the McCain campaign nixed another candidate, Paul Manafort, who runs a lobbying firm with McCain's campaign manager, Rick Davis."
http://www.newsweek.com/id/161218
"A Freddie Mac Money Trail Catches Up With McCain: Last week, though, McCain's trust in his campaign manager Rick Davis was tested again amid disclosures that Freddie Mac, the troubled mortgage giant that was recently placed under federal conservatorship, paid his campaign manager's firm $15,000 a month between 2006 and August 2008."
DEMOCRATS TRY TO PASS THEIR OWN REGULATORY LEGISLATION BUT SEN. RICHARD SHELBY (R-ALABAMA) KILLS REGULATORY LEGISLATION AUTHORED BY SEN. PAUL SARBANES (D-MARYLAND)
"During deliberations, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Alabama) dismissed the alternative submitted by ranking member Sen. Paul Sarbanes (D-Maryland)."
DEMOCRATS SUCCEEDED IN PASSING REGULATORY LEGISLATION ONLY 2 MONTHS AFTER REGAINING A SLIM MAJORITY IN CONGRESS IN 2007 BUT IT WAS TOO LATE TO STOP THE MOMENTUM OF FREDDIE MAC'S COLLAPSE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rz-d6WPTXa8
BARNEY FRANK: "I became chairman of the Banking Committee on January 31st 2007. Less than 2 months later, I did what the Republicans hadn't been able to do in 12 years -- get through the committee a very tough regulatory bill and it passed the House in May. I've always felt 2 things about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- that they had important roles to play but that their regulation should be improved. From 1995 to 2006 when the Republicans controlled Congress, no regulatory legislation was passed. The first time I had any real authority on this was January of 2007 and within 2 months we had passed a bill that regulated Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The earliest chance we got to put tough regulation on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, we did it.
BILL O'RIELLY: "Ok. Alright, that's swell."
IN FACT, IT WAS REPUBLICAN PHILL GRAMM (R-TEXAS) WHO LED THE REPUBLICAN OPPOSITION TO PASSING REGULATORY LEGISLATION
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/17/business/economy...
“'Some people look at subprime lending and see evil. I look at subprime lending and I see the American dream in action,' Phil Gramm (R-Texas) said.
On Capitol Hill, Mr. Gramm became the most effective proponent of deregulation in a generation. And in one remarkable stretch from 1999 to 2001, he pushed laws and promoted policies that he says unshackled businesses from needless restraints but his critics charge significantly contributed to the financial crisis that has rattled the nation.
He led the effort to block measures curtailing deceptive or predatory lending, which was just beginning to result in a jump in home foreclosures that would undermine the financial markets. He advanced legislation that fractured oversight of Wall Street while knocking down Depression-era barriers that restricted the rise and reach of financial conglomerates. And he pushed through a provision that ensured virtually no regulation of the complex financial instruments known as derivatives, including credit swaps, contracts that would encourage risky investment practices at Wall Street’s most venerable institutions and spread the risks, like a virus, around the world.
From 1999 to 2001, Congress first considered steps to curb predatory loans — those that typically had high fees, significant prepayment penalties and ballooning monthly payments and were often issued to low-income borrowers. Foreclosures on such loans were on the rise, setting off a wave of personal bankruptcies. But Mr. Gramm did everything he could to block the measures. In 2000, he refused to have his banking committee consider the proposals, an intervention hailed by the National Association of Mortgage Brokers as a 'huge, huge step for us.' A year later, he objected again when Democrats tried to stop lenders from being able to pursue claims in bankruptcy court against borrowers who had defaulted on predatory loans.
In late 1999, Mr. Gramm played a central role in what would be the most significant financial services legislation since the Depression. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, as the measure was called, removed barriers between commercial and investment banks that had been instituted to reduce the risk of economic catastrophes.
Michael D. Donovan, a former S.E.C. lawyer, faulted Mr. Gramm for his insistence on deregulating the derivatives market. 'He was the architect, advocate and the most knowledgeable person in Congress on these topics. To me, Phil Gramm is the single most important reason for the current financial crisis.'"-
Neutral
BB6410 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I think we've learned from Arther Anderson, accounting and laws are only as good or honest as the people working the numbers. We have had some of the super banks go under while at the same time many of the smaller ones are gaining strength, at least here in the midwest. McCain asked about this and it was the DNC that prevented the questioning. Again, here in Milwaukee much of the bad loans were made because to refuse the loan, accusations of racism were used. At least in this region of the country, racism is the beat all end all.
Reply
You mention FEC. A useless organization if there ever was one. Where the hell were they when the junk mortgages first hit the markets? All C, D, E and some B rated mortgages are risky investments. They're called derivatives. In some cases they helped fund Microsoft in others they died over night. In the 1980's derivatives earned the name "Junk Bond". When you invest in junk bonds you actually sign a separate form clearly stating you understand this is a very high risk investment and that you stand a better chance of failure than success. It's an unsound investment tool. I bought into several mortgage funds but none of them stated they were funding junk mortgages. Where are the hearings asking why or how this happened. When I have my series 67, had I failed to mention this, I faced forfeitures and even jail. The House and Senate are in the DNC control. They can call hearings about a college super bowl, base ball drug use or some other waste of time but this they remain silent. I smell a rat and it's coming from your side of the isle. I think you're afraid of what will come out.-
Neutral
ybdogsct10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
BB64:
Reply
"I think we've learned from Arther Anderson, accounting and laws are only as good or honest as the people working the numbers...I smell a rat and it's coming from your side of the isle. I think you're afraid of what will come out."
Guess again.
You have plenty speculation but no evidence.
How expected.
The FACT is that Arthur Anderson and Texas-based Enron were firm supporters of the Republican Party , particularly GW Bush's administration.
REPUBLICANS NOMINATE ENRON LOBBYIST TO BE PARTY CHAIRMAN
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0...
"As questions intensify about Enron's ties to the White House, Republicans who gathered here today for the party's winter meeting said they were not entirely reassured after last week's decision by the newly selected party chairman, Marc Racicot, to stop lobbying for a firm whose biggest clients included Enron."
REPUBLICAN PHIL GRAMM'S WIFE SAT ON ENRON'S BOARD OF DIRECTORS
http://www.rense.com/general19/en.htm
"A Senate panel probing energy conglomerate Enron Corp.'s sudden collapse sent a subpoena Friday to Texas Republican Sen. Phil Gramm's wife, Wendy Gramm. Wendy Gramm has been a member of Enron's board of directors for eight years and of the crucial Audit and Compliance Committee as the giant company's financial condition was deteriorating.
Phil Gramm is the second-largest recipient in the Senate of financial contributions from Enron, receiving $97,350 from the company between 1989 and 2001, according to data provided by The Center for Responsive Politics. The senator receiving the largest contribution from Enron is Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson, R-Texas, who received $99,500.
President Bush also has received political and financial support from Enron and Lay in all his political races. John Ashcroft received a $25,000 contribution from Enron during his run for re-election to the Senate from Missouri and in an unsuccessful attempt to win the Republican presidential nomination."
ENRON'S TIES TO THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY
http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1...
"The country was quickly reminded of the pervasive reach of Enron and its executives—the biggest contributors to the Presidential campaign of George W. Bush—when U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft had to recuse himself from the probe because he had received $57,499 in campaign cash from Enron for his failed 2000 Senate re-election bid in Missouri. Then the entire office of the U.S. Attorney in Houston recused itself because too many of its prosecutors had personal ties to Enron executives—or to angry workers who have been fired or have seen their life savings disappear.
Bush told reporters that he had not talked with Enron CEO Kenneth L. Lay about the company's woes. But the White House later acknowledged that Lay, a longtime friend of Bush's, had lobbied Commerce Secretary Don Evans and Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill."
ENRON TOOK ADVANTAGE OF LAX REGULATION ITH THE HELP OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION
http://www.publiccitizen.org/cmep/energy_enviro_nu...
"President Bush's presidential campaign received significant financial support from Enron ($1.14 million). Enron took advantage of lax oversight following deregulation and formed a complicated web of more than 2,800 subsidiaries -- more than 30 percent (874) of which were located in officially designated offshore tax and bank havens."
REPUBLICAN ALAN GREENSPAN ALSO ACCEPTS BLAME
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/business/economy...
Critics, including many economists, now blame the former Fed chairman for the financial crisis that is tipping the economy into a potentially deep recession. Mr. Greenspan’s critics say that he encouraged the bubble in housing prices by keeping interest rates too low for too long and that he failed to rein in the explosive growth of risky and often fraudulent mortgage lending.
“You had the authority to prevent irresponsible lending practices that led to the subprime mortgage crisis. You were advised to do so by many others,” said Representative Henry A. Waxman of California, chairman of the committee. “Do you feel that your ideology pushed you to make decisions that you wish you had not made?”
Mr. Greenspan conceded: “Yes, I’ve found a flaw. I don’t know how significant or permanent it is. But I’ve been very distressed by that fact.”
-
-
-
-
-
100%
ybdogsct10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
PATRIOTIC AMERICAN:
Reply
"THE ANSWER IS..........NO he has no intention of listening to them he is just making a show like he cares"
That's a laughable charge coming from a supporter of the Republican Party. The truth is that it was the REPUBLICAN Party who went to extreme lengths to exclude Democrats from the legislative process.
REPUBLICANS REFUSING DEMOCRATIC INPUT ON MEDICARE & ENERGY BILLS
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/10...
"On two of the most critical bills this Congress has considered -- the Medicare and energy bills -- Republican committee members met in private, refusing to allow entry to Democrats by claiming that the meetings were not official conference sessions.
While Republican leaders claimed to obey congressional rules by allowing Democrats to attend the opening and closing sessions, the actual writing of the bills was done in secret and exclusively by Republicans; in some cases, Democrats didn't even know in which room their committee colleagues were holed up writing the bill. Democrats were not permitted entry into the closed-door talks to write the complicated bill."
EXCLUSION OF DEMOCRATS FROM BUDGET RESOLUTIONS, TAX CUTS, TRADE, MEDICARE, FAMILY PLANNING AND MOST MAJOR BILLS
http://www.spa.american.edu/ccps/getpdf.php?table=...
"Bush chose to govern from the 'right-in' rather than the 'center-out.' This pattern held on budget resolutions, tax cuts, energy, Medicare prescription drugs, family planning and abortion, trade, and most other major bills. This tended to leave Democrats out of the equation and to put great pressure on Republican moderates to acquiesce in positions formulated by the conservative 'majority within the majority.'
The exclusion of Democrats from conference committees reached a new high in 2003, facilitated by unified Republican control of the House, Senate, and Presidency. The extraordinary lengths to which the Republicans went to win roll-call votes represented a further shutting out of Democrats, for the idea was to win with as little bipartisan accommodation as possible. 'The Republicans had better hope that the Democrats never regain the majority,' Sen. John McCain warned in late 2003."
ILLEGAL EXCLUSION OF DEMOCRATS AND PUBLIC INTEREST GROUPS FROM CHENEY'S ENERGY MEETINGS
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20020415/nichols
"Vice President Dick Cheney cleared his calendar for an April 17 private meeting with Lay regarding what aides described as 'energy policy matters' and 'the energy crisis in California.' Cheney and his aides met at least six times with Lay and other Enron officials while preparing the National Energy Policy Development Group's report, which is the basis for the Administration's energy policy proposals. When Cheney and Lay met in April 2001, Lay handed Cheney a three-page "wish list" of corporate recommendations.
Under the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972, task forces like Cheney's must conduct public meetings, must allow interested parties to attend and must keep publicly available records. But arguing "executive privilege," Cheney, his aides and Cabinet departments have refused requests for records, despite legal challenges from the General Accounting Office and private groups."
When oil execs were questioned about the existence of this PRIVATE meeting, they LIED about it before Congress with the help of Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), who refused to swear them under oath:
http://commerce.senate.gov/public/_files/energy110...
"CHAIRMAN TED STEVENS: The question whether Senator Domenici and I should administer oaths to these witnesses. I shall not administer an oath today.
CANTWELL: Mr. Chairman, I did send you a letter cosigned by eight of my colleagues asking that the witnesses be sworn in. This rare joint hearing--
STEVENS: I did not yield to make a statement.
BOXER: Mr. Chairman, I would like the committee to vote on whether we swear--
STEVENS: There will be no vote. It is not in order at all.
BOXER: Mr. Chairman, I move that we swear in the witnesses.
STEVENS: And I rule that out of order.
CANTWELL: I second the motion.
STEVENS: Thank you very much. That is the last we are going to hear about that because it is out of order. "
BILL THOMAS (R-CA) CONFESSES TO PLOT TO EXCLUDE DEMOCRATS FROM LEGISLATIVE PROCESS
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0...
"Bill Thomas (R-CA) broke down in tears on the House floor today as he confessed to a hushed assemblage that he summoned the Capitol police to break up a meeting of Democrats. Late in the evening of July 17, Republican committee staffers substantially rewrote the Portman-Cardin bill and Thomas introduced the new 90-page bill as a substitute the next day, demanding a vote before any congressmen of either party had a chance to read it. The legislation is both complex and controversial. The Democrats objected and adjourned to a nearby library to review their options, leaving behind a single member, Pete Stark of California, to delay action by the committee by exercising his prerogative to have the bill read line-by-line. Thomas summoned the Capitol police to eject the Democrats from their impromptu meeting room, claiming they were engaging in disorderly conduct." -
100%
vor10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well if it means listening to further talk of tax cuts for the wealthy he shouldn't listen to them. Amazing how these same Republicans who are now screaming about deficit spending put out budget after budget loaded with debt from 2001-2008. Further exacerbating the situation with the off-budget debt of Iraq. The first time we ever cut taxes in a time of war.
Reply
How hard is it to deal with the fact that trickle down doesn't work? Americans should be outraged at the suggestion we continue to follow such a wrong headed course. Meanwhile these same slimy folks that created these issues are busy doling out bonuses to themselves with taxpayer money meant as a remedy.
We are a very sick country. Close to a failed experiment. Sick from greed - both corporate and individual. Failure over the next four years would leave much of America as a Third World country. And even worse could open the door for the likes of Sarah Palin. Just the type of tool needed to finish off the republic.
I haven't traveled much domestically of late but a recent trip to South Memphis gave me a glimpse of what the future may hold. Shuttered stores, chain restaurants still recognizable only from their facades, now boarded up. An economy of convenience stores, check cashing outlets, and liquor stores. Trash blowing in the streets. You could see this was once a prosperous area, it wasn't a ghetto before. That lies much closer to downtown. It won't take much to tip the scales in a similar fashion in many other communities. -
-
-
-
17%
EDWARDIII10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
we had two chances to elect real experts on bipartizan governing and we rejected them. I should say the democrats rejected them. Democrats have proved for the last 8 years that partizan hatred-- not opposition, hatred-- is their standard of behavior.
Reply -
-
33%
BB6410 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Are Democrats nothing more than tax and spend on liberal projects for special interest groups. I loved the part of the educational spending and the clause no private institution would be eligible. So all choice programs are prevented from participating. The teacher's unions who at least in Milwaukee have produced some of the best street people, are getting more money to fail even better.
Reply
Another part was for condoms. How does that help? Unless this was part of the funding for Larry Flint. He's been a big supporter of the DNC causes and Nancy Pelosi for years. He asked for help for the porn industry.
The stimulus is a scam. It's huge spending on liberal causes from the last 40 years. They couldn't have gotten this passed in the old days so now they're renamed it. Scam, scam, scam.-
mntnman444Comment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned
-
100%
ybdogsct10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
BB64:
Reply
"I loved the part of the educational spending and the clause no private institution would be eligible. So all choice programs are prevented from participating. The teacher's unions who at least in Milwaukee have produced some of the best street people, are getting more money to fail even better."
Quote and cite the line that states how much of the bailout money the teacher's union will be receiving. Exactly which teacher's union is receiving it: the national branch, state branch, district branch?
Giving money to underfunded public education programs is NOT equivalent to funneling money to a nonprofit teacher's union. In fact, depending upon the state and district in which you live, the majority of teachers in your district may not even be members of a teacher's union.
Your statement reveals how little you know about the public education system.
BB64:
"Another part was for condoms. How does that help? Unless this was part of the funding for Larry Flint. He's been a big supporter of the DNC causes and Nancy Pelosi for years. He asked for help for the porn industry."
Really? Show me exactly how Larry Flint aims to receive a single cent from the funds going to birth control.
FYI, unaffordable healthcare bills are the number one cause of people losing their savings.
How much does a condom cost? Compared to that, how much does an abortion cost? Oh wait, I forgot. You're a Republican and don't believe in a woman's right to choose. In that case, how much does childbirth and child support cost?
Condoms are a cheap investment in preventive healthcare.-
Neutral
sinophil4910 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
ybdogsct - Your comments are right on target. I just wanted to add that condoms significantly reduces (not eliminate) the transmission of STD's.
Reply
BB does not grasp the social significance of teen pregnancies. Not only does it burden the health care system, it has a major negative impact on the lives of these teens. Teens who become pregnant are more likely to drop out of school and not finish their education. Their lifetime earnings are significantly lower. They have a greater chance of ending up on welfare.
All for want of a little wad of latex material.-
100%
EDWARDIII10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Condoms are wonderful, and so cheap that every municipality can afford them. Why is it necessary for the federals to get involved? Further discussion could reasonably suggest that abstinance is a good thing. Would you be in favour of a fed mandate to pay for abstinance advisors to go to all the schools, wheather welcome or not? An argument that this or that is a good thing does not have to translate into a government program.
Reply-
Neutral
ybdogsct10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
EDWARDIII:
Reply
"Why is it necessary for the federals to get involved?"
You seem to object out of a conservative belief that funding family planning programs would only increase federal spending. But that is NOT the case. In fact, according to the CBO, this investment in preventive healthcare will SAVE the government money in the long run.
And as far as local and state governments are concerned, most are already awash in debt and can't afford the initial invest in this program (even if it means it would save them money in the long-term), which is precisely why the federal government is getting involved.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/28/us/politics/28ob...
"Democrats stripped from it a provision that Republicans had ridiculed as having nothing to do with economic stimulus, one expanding federal Medicaid coverage of family planning services. The Congressional Budget Office had estimated that the provision would actually save the government $200 million over five years by reducing pregnancy and postnatal-care expenses."
EDWARDIII:
"Would you be in favour of a fed mandate to pay for abstinance advisors to go to all the schools, wheather welcome or not?"
FYI, that's already happened under GW Bush.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-11-25...
"President Bush's re-election insures that more federal money will flow to abstinence education that precludes discussion of birth control. Congress last weekend included more than $131 million for abstinence programs in a $388 billion spending bill."
The only problem with Bush's abstinence-only programs is the scientific data demonstrating that they are NOT EFFECTIVE .
http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/abstinence07/factsheet.sht...
"Findings indicate that youth who were assigned to the Title V abstinence education “program group” were no more likely than youth who were assigned to the “services as usual” control group to have abstained from sex. Those who reported having sex had similar numbers of sexual partners and had initiated sex at the same mean age. Contrary to concerns raised by critics of abstinence education, program group youth were no more likely to have engaged in unprotected sex than control group youth."
So to answer your question, no, I wouldn't oppose abstinence advisors as long as these medical professionals also taught birth control (i.e. condoms) in addition to abstinence. If we're going to invest in preventive healthcare to save money in the long-term, we might as well invest it in programs that WORK .
-
-
-
-
-
-
HMMaceComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned
-
Neutral
EDWARDIII10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
To get money into the economy thre are two quick methods. The less efficient of the two is to give tax money to poor people who tend to spend it right away. Democrats love this because it gives them a chance to seem generous and caring while they use public money to buy votes. The other way is to cut taxes, especially coroprate taxes. Even the Republicans are afraid to do this because of the current assumption that corporations are evil.
Reply
This TARP business looks like a way to put galactic power into the hands of a few individuals, some of whom must certainly become corrupted by it. It reminds me of text book procurement. One wonders who at Prentice-Hall slept with who at the Board of Education....
loading ...
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.