patrick.net

staynumz says

Wrong. He is still classified as an enemy combatant. And if military tribunals are not a good option, why is owebama still having them as we speak? Why do you think the hairy guy should be tried here and not all enemy combatants that are picked up around the world?

If someone is picked up on non-US soil, attacking our military specifically, then I don't have a major issue with them being tried in a tribunal, at least in regions where there is no stable local government. The US civil system has no authority over crimes committed outside of our borders. Even the conventions are somewhat vague on this, since these paramilitary organizations weren't much of an issue back then. It was either "you're a member of an enemy army" or "you're a criminal". For someone who is accused of attacking civilians, or civilian infrastructure, it's a civil matter. Very simple. Please give one argument for why KSM shouldn't be tried in a civilian court. Did he attack our military? Is he a member of the military of a country that we're at war with? It seems to me that he planned an attack on our civilian infrastructure. Do you think Timmy McVeigh should have gotten a military tribunal? How about Jeffrey Dahmer? Where do you even draw the line? Why are you so in favor of giving so much power to the military anyway? Isn't that the sort of big government crap you people are usually against (well, that and railing about the "unconstitutionality" of taxes or health care or something, ignoring things that are actually in the constitution like habeas corpus).

I really don't understand this assumption that tax rates have anything to do with prosperity. The world is full of countries with wildly varying tax rates, and there is little to no correlation with economic prosperity.

You'd pay about the same amount in taxes in Switzerland as you would in Bosnia (both much, much lower than the US).

Most of sub-saharan africa has little to no taxes (the government, or local warlods, just confiscates everything else)

Please cite some actual arguments for how lower (or higher) taxes would make much of a difference at all. History shows us that it does not.

If tax rates are too high, people simply don't pay them, and prices / wages tend to be offset to cover the difference anyway.

If tax rates are too low to cover expenses, governments just borrow (there are very few "prosperous" countries that don't have an enormous debt).

Factors that actually affect prosperity are:

1. Governmental stability. Bitch about our government all you want, but would you prefer a dictatorship or a bunch of warlords?

2. Infrastructure. You need good power grids, clean water, and adequate roads to support business development.

3. Security. If your country is constantly at war and being invaded, it's difficult to prosper (and this usually affects both 1 and 2).

Find a country that has all three of those things and you will find a prosperous nation. Find a country that is severely lacking in any of them and you'll find a country that is not that prosperous.

Hmmm. I don't know. There is another group out there taking another tact, arguing that the vaccination was produced too quickly. Shoved out the door without proper testing. I brought my daughter to a clinic just yesterday. In and out, no waiting at all. Personally, I think the hype is way of line with the reality. Bird-flu, SARS, Swine, et cetera, et cetera.

I don't know reniam, I work in a major metro hospital, I don't recall seeing so many kiddos die from the regualr flu as I've seen with H1N1. And the number of admissions are tapering off, is it just a coincidence that the vaccine is now available and has been for over a month. Maybe people are fnally being more cautious, staying home when ill, washing hands, etc. Watch a normally child or young adult die of H1N1 and tell me it's hype...

Actually, the original premise put forth by elvis is that we need a much smaller government, which in turn would require less taxes. I'm a little skeptical about his number that the government consumes 45% of GDP---if that corresponds to the $1.2T/year stat, then I'm surprised that our economy is so small.

But to elvis' point, if you take Kevin's #1-3 (stability, infrastructure, security), then our government has taken on a rather huge array of supplemental duties. I wouldn't mind if we got our federal government back towards defense, justice and basic Constitutional functions.

Brand says

Actually, the original premise put forth by elvis is that we need a much smaller government, which in turn would require less taxes. I’m a little skeptical about his number that the government consumes 45% of GDP—if that corresponds to the $1.2T/year stat, then I’m surprised that our economy is so small.
But to elvis’ point, if you take Kevin’s #1-3 (stability, infrastructure, security), then our government has taken on a rather huge array of supplemental duties. I wouldn’t mind if we got our federal government back towards defense, justice and basic Constitutional functions.

I would love it!

Brand says

I wouldn’t mind if we got our federal government back towards defense, justice and basic Constitutional functions.

and free Jameson shots for every one!!!!

Brand says

Actually, the original premise put forth by elvis is that we need a much smaller government, which in turn would require less taxes. I’m a little skeptical about his number that the government consumes 45% of GDP—if that corresponds to the $1.2T/year stat, then I’m surprised that our economy is so small.
But to elvis’ point, if you take Kevin’s #1-3 (stability, infrastructure, security), then our government has taken on a rather huge array of supplemental duties. I wouldn’t mind if we got our federal government back towards defense, justice and basic Constitutional functions.

Having those three things is what puts you in the league of 'places where you would actually want to live if you had a choice'.

Once you get to that, though, it all becomes a matter of the kind of lifestyle you prefer living and what you want to prioritize.

I'd point out here that there really isn't that much of a quality of life difference based on the size of government or the tax base.

Really, take a look at countries that meet my three criteria for prosperity, and then look at the size of government. In all cases it's fairly large (on order of 10-15% of GDP -- about the same as the US despite that bullshit 45% figure that was tossed around previously). It's really just a matter of how we choose to spend it. Do you really think there's all that much of a difference amongst wealthy countries in terms of quality of life? Go visit sometime and you probably won't.

Personally, I'd be OK with the size of our government (in terms of overall spending) if we spent about a third as much on defense and about twice as much on education, and ultimately have a stable tax / spending structure that allows us to take on debt in times of crisis but pay it back during times of prosperity (taking on debt when the economy is strong makes no sense whatsoever).

I don't necessarily believe that we need the government to run health care, but I also don't think it matters much if we do. I do know that our current system is just plain broken, though, and any of the systems in use by other wealthy countries would be better for us.

I also think we should kill off antiquated subsidies for agriculture and businesses of the 19th and early 20th centuries.

Ultimately, I don't really mind if I pay higher taxes as long as it means better quality of life. Yes, I will gladly pay good money if it means good education for everyone, or better power grids, or cleaner water, or healthier air, or whatever. I'm not a big fan of paying $1m per soldier to fight an unwinnable war or to shell out cash to farmers in order to keep food prices artificially high.

@elvis--

McAfee won't even let me go to mwhodges site-it says to go there with extreme caution. He must be a real pillar of the economic community.... I'd take what he says with many grains of salt.

Kevin, I tend to agree with your point that quality of life is pretty similar in stable countries with good infrastructure and adequate resources. From this and the "young people" thread, I personally don't think the U.S. could collapse into anarchy. I think we're headed towards the same fate as Europe. The state is paying for more, but the price will be diminished social mobility (I've seen that firsthand in Germany), and much lower growth. By definition, the government is a consumer, not a producer.

That said, sometimes I wonder if we're on the Roman road of fighting endless wars, which can eventually bankrupt a country. Look how destabilizing Germany became when they were bankrupt far beyond their ability to support the debt.

elvis says

It seems like kind of a simple choice to me. I’d take the ‘correction and healing’ choice over the ‘collapse’ choice any day. I choose Freedom and Liberty.

sounds like a false choice to me.

@Elvis-
Or it could be that the politicians know more than you and are actually making the correct choices as we speak. Judging from your earlier posts, I'm fairly certain that this is the case. The only thing you are right about is "too much war"....
You talk a lot about having a "sound currency". Any idea what effect that would have for companies who export? Or for companies considering building a new plant (in the states vs. overseas)? For jobs in the US? Think about it...

Plunging America into massive debt and crushing interest payments is not making wise choic es. Just wait till interest rates start going UP, what then - print more money? Maybe you haven't noticed America has painted herself into an economic corner.

Yes, going back to sound money would be painful, so is detox - but its the right thing to do. Continuing to building our financial house of cards higher and higher, knowing the house is built on unstable soil is downright stupid. Do you know why? (Hint: it's GOING to collapse). And the higher the house of cards is allowed to grow, the worse its going to be when it all falls down.

Tatupu70, are you a politician...or just ill informed about whats happening around you? By your comments I can't tell the difference.

tatupu70 says

@Elvis-

Or it could be that the politicians know more than you and are actually making the correct choices as we speak. Judging from your earlier posts, I’m fairly certain that this is the case.

Y

Are you kidding me? I can't think of a single thing the "politicians" have done right in the past 10 years. They certainly effed up the economy and haven't done a thing to solve the growing problem with deficit spending.

staynumz says

And these are the same private companies that will handle our health care under the dems. Confidence inspiring?

Now I'm really laughing. You're blaming a private company's problems on Obama? You really need to watch it--the hypocrisy is becoming very obvious. Government intervention is bad, but letting private companies work is also bad. Hmmm.....

staynumz says

Not quite as insane as blaming boosh for katrina. And these are the same private companies that will handle our health care under the dems. Confidence inspiring?

We don't blame Bush for Katrina; he is to blame for appointing an incompetent to head FEMA, ignore the problems that occurred as a result of the poor response, and for congratulating the people responsible for the poor response while people were hungry, homeless, in horrible squalor in the convention center, and barely surviving. He is to blame for using the incident as a PR ploy rather than responding with the the people and supplies necessary to help during a horrible time in our lives. Your train of thought, if there is one, is hard to follow and you make no real sense. You should continue to do everything you can to stay numb - but share with us what you use to do so; if only we could follow suit we might be able to translate your posts into something understandable.

I really can't see how you can blame how "The administration" for swine flu shot shortages. I believe they attempted to give the companies that manufacture it as much time as possible. The problem with any kind of drug is it needs to be properly tested before being approved for distrubution. If someone you know is dying from a condition (weather it's a desease, virus, cancer, whatever) and they were developing a drug to cure it. You can bet you would be demanding they release it to your love one yesterday. Demanding every day what's the frigging hold up, why can you morons give us the drug already. If they were to bow to your pressure and just send you the drug and A. It doesn't work as promised, people could lose valueable time trying a fruitless treatment when there limited time could be spent trying something else, Or B. The drug give sides effect, perhaps even lethal ones. You would be the first one in line demanding the head of the A hole that shipped a drug without proper testing. You would want to sue them for every penny. Despite all the advances in computers, telecommunications, and other technology, the medical field of drug development hasn't advanced since the 1940's. It's the same method of give the drug to one group and give a fake drug to the other and compare the results after months of testing. We are too MTV, McDonald's instant gratification society. We want it NOW. Drug development doesn't work that way. Even when a drug does work, anything not synthedic takes time to cultivate it. If you can't mix chemicals A and B together to make the drug, throwing billions of dollars at a problem isn't going to make a culture develop any faster or a plant that your trying to havest an extract from grow any faster. Yes, the shortages suck, but it's not anything the Obama Administration did wrong, it's the nature of the beast.

@ staynumz No--the point is that making vaccines isn't an exact science. And from what I've read, this particular strain grew slowly. So, there really isn't any blame to go around...

Don't we still make Gatorade and instant Lipton chicken noodle soup? People don't die because they get the Flu, they die because they don't stay home and keep hydrated, and nutrition levels up. Instead they going out to Movie week end openings and fly across country and even the globe. They die because they failed to take care of them selves and the flu. And then whey they are to sick to gallivant about, They go home and try to sleep and starve their body of electrolytes, vitamin C and fresh fruits and a poultry stock soup. Not even as much as a Motrin to keep their fever down. Then whey it gets so high it's critical it's usually to late to call the ambulance or rush down to the emergency room.

staynumz says

I am blaming owebama for the way he handled the response to the swine flu vaccine.

Nomograph says

Don’t you *ever* get tired of being wrong? Don’t you *ever* question what you hear on AM talk radio?

I bow to thee, dear Nomo.

2nd class, right you are. Many posters don't understand deficit spending. Think of it as spending money you haven't earned yet. This is not a very good idea.

Posters could learn more by reading "Web of Debt", "Empire of Debt" or anything by Ron Paul. Happy Thanksgiving.

2ndClassCitizen says

Are you kidding me? I can’t think of a single thing the “politicians” have done right in the past 10 years. They certainly effed up the economy and haven’t done a thing to solve the growing problem with deficit spending

No arguing that we had 8 years of one of the crappiest Presidents ever. So, I would agree that we had 8 years of bad decisions. But if you'll remember the 8 years before Bush, there was a balanced budget. So, it's not really that long ago...

elvis says

Kevin, I completely disagree with your assertion that “There really isn’t that much of a quality of life difference based on the size of government or the tax base.

Try spending 5 minutes in another country. Have you ever even visited another wealthy country?

mwhodges.com is a link farm. I'd love to see how someone could claim that 45% of GDP is consumed by the government.

Kevin, how on earth can you say "I'd love to see how someone could claim 45% of the GDP is consumed by government?" Perhaps you didn't really read the information on mwhodges.com?

ITS SPELLED OUT IN PLAIN ENGLISH, COMPLETE WITH CHARTS, GRAPHS AND SOURCE'S OF DATA.

The data is from the Bureau of Economic Analysis and the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Go back and really READ it this time, its so obvious even a cave man would understand it.

tatupu70 says

Or it could be that the politicians know more than you and are actually making the correct choices as we speak. J

Tatu, you said "Or it could be that the politicians know more than you and are actually making the correct choices as we speak."

So you agree with increased deficit spending? Bailouts etc?

Honest Abe says

Kevin, how on earth can you say “I’d love to see how someone could claim 45% of the GDP is consumed by government?” Perhaps you didn’t really read the information on mwhodges.com?
ITS SPELLED OUT IN PLAIN ENGLISH, COMPLETE WITH CHARTS, GRAPHS AND SOURCE’S OF DATA.
The data is from the Bureau of Economic Analysis and the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Go back and really READ it this time, its so obvious even a cave man would understand it.

No, it's a link farm. Are you sure you're even aware of the site you're visiting?

OK, just google: the grandfather report.

I am John Galt.

hmmm ..... another bubble ..... maybe we will see "peek gold" huh? lol

when we see "peek corn" and "peek rice", we will not be happy.

Bubble or no, why would people prefer to buy coins over bullion? If you're going for collector's value, I guess it makes sense, but is there really any other reason to prefer the eagles over bars of the stuff?

staynumz says

And who gave this company the contract to make the vaccine? Wow, you are so easy.

Do you think making a flu vaccine is like injection molding a plastic toy for a McDonalds Happy Meal? And that there are thousands of companies capable of doing it? The "Feds" as you call them, just make up a couple of drawings and open it up for bids? Seriously--staynumz, give up this thread. It was ridiculous to begin with and with each post you make it worse....

Which will just drive home prices down further.

Wage inflation? hahahahahahaha

Just the latest installment of the that sucking sound coming to a wallet near you. It's the continuation of the biggest transfer of weath from the middle and lower classes to that top 1% ever. Just wait until the dollar isn't even worth it's value as a fire starter.

Wait... Since when is Fox Noise part of the main stream media?

It was and always will be a political propaganda arm of the extreme Right Wing of the Republican Party.

staynumz says

Nomograph says

staynumz says

The feds control who makes the vaccine’s.

The vaccine was developed and manufactured in France by Sanofi-Aventis, a French company. Don’t you *ever* get tired of being wrong? Don’t you *ever* question what you hear on AM talk radio?

And who gave this company the contract to make the vaccine? Wow, you are so easy.

It's all a conspiracy. I see clearly now.

Clearly, since it's a french company making the vaccine, it's a conspiracy by the french islamofascistliberalterrorists to take over the US and turn us all into gay french muslims.

errc says

name me one thing that ISN’T twice as expensive today as it was in 1999.

Are you kidding? I can't think of anything that has doubled in 10 years. Other than gas maybe.

tatupu70 says

errc says

name me one thing that ISN’T twice as expensive today as it was in 1999.

Are you kidding? I can’t think of anything that has doubled in 10 years. Other than gas maybe.

What about a 20 min phone call? I think that has gone up. :) I agree with you, I can't think of much that has increased in price over the past 10 years.

It doesn't matter. The segment I'm concerned with is the mid-high end in the bay area. No investors are going to buy in that segment, there's no way to make them cash flow positive. It's not even close.

Investors can buy all the low-end homes they want, I don't care, I'm not interested in those.

Massive dollar printing resumes...

CrazyMan says

It doesn’t matter. The segment I’m concerned with is the mid-high end in the bay area. No investors are going to buy in that segment, there’s no way to make them cash flow positive. It’s not even close.
Investors can buy all the low-end homes they want, I don’t care, I’m not interested in those.

It does matter and "Location Location" hasn't mattered in almost 10 years now.
Those hoitey toitey neighborhoods have foreclosed abandoned distressed properties just like all of the others. The up keep demand is still there, or the city fines the bank and the bank doesn't like that extra liability. The property just in state of being empty, drags the price on all other existing homes around them. The NAR doesn't like that nor does the neighbors. Cities lose taxes, politicians don't like that. Politically there must be a network, where houses can be scuttled at a great short term loss. That the banks make up for with math that shows long term savings. Yes there is these guys are the ones with cash on hand waiting for the banks phone calls to buy them up minutes after they hit the MLS list, if it makes it that far. People having Realtors that send them daily MLS feeds never see these houses. Or it very well may be that empty house you've been watching for months or years. And to your knowledge every one you know including you, have put offers on those houses, yet there it sat empty all of this time. Suddenly come into a new coat of paint, and a new for sale sign out front. They can afford to rent it out as long as it takes. It's not costing them any thing at this point. They own it out right, and cash isn't a problem. They've got hundreds of Scott Rothstein's out there finding suckers to invest money that in less than 7 degrees to Kevin Bacon, I'm sure ties back to funds used to secure these property. But to investigate Scott or Bernard, it's just lost and vanished Billions.

The weaker homes in every community is being sacrificed to save the long term value of the other existing properties.

I mean granted these aren't the best houses on the block.