Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Freedom Fighter who wrote (86482)	12/9/2000 12:14:36 PM
From: Don Lloyd	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

Wayne - You seem to be more concerned about the present situation than I am.... I have no strong disagreement with most of the positions that you have laid out, with the exception that the 'solutions' that will be advanced in times of economic crisis will be both popular and worse in effect than the problems. The real issues to me are the need to purge the utterly politicized corruption in the executive branch, especially the Justice Department, and the likelihood of a further shift to an activist Supreme Court and other judiciary. It is not that a Bush executive branch would be in any way exemplary, but that eight consecutive years of Clinton-Gore have already overflowed the sewage treatment plant, and it needs to be cleaned out before it becomes completely encrusted. Regards, Don

To: Freedom Fighter who wrote (86482)	12/9/2000 2:44:30 PM
From: Dan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

Wayne -may I please comment on your note. I think the government (and judicial system) tend to lag the ideology of the people. We have seen "The winning at all cost" in business and individuals first. Now it has manifested into uor government. "The only fears I have are that the left puts huge programs in place that fill a present public need, but that are totally unsound economically in the long run." Since the breakup of the Brenton Woods agreement, (and maybe before) we are becoming a one world business. That with currencies fluxuating by the minute, that pricing around the world tends to move towards parity. So, if the dollar is strong for a long time, what does it mean? I think it means that less is going back to the people in the U.S. versus other countries. We work harder, and get less back from the gov. Thus, dollar gets stronger. But, people can only work so hard, and at that point, a country can't compete with other countries very well. (The closest I can think of off hand is Switzerland -now trying to devalue its currency). So, the best thing is spend the money on public needs NOW. Not the shallow promises of the future. All money spent creates activity that creates jobs. And that is the policy -too create full employment. (Not employee shortages, that cause inflation). So with full employment now, the money should be spent on healing the sick, education, and other activities that will produce future workers. Now if you think all that money is spent on the poor and deadbeats, then lets give them a check every year for 25K and they would all be middle class (and would be less than we are spending now.) (Or send them to school for the next 2 decades and let them become professors and doctors.) So, I think this shows the money is not going to the poor. They are still poor! It is money that is just creating activity for businesses.

To: Freedom Fighter who wrote (86482)	12/11/2000 1:07:59 AM
From: Richard Nehrboss	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

Wayne, I tend to share your, what appear to be, libertarian perspectives. I almost had one of those conflicts on whether or not to vote for W or Browne, but alas, I go with what's reasonable and practical RE: The only fears I have are that the left puts huge programs in place that fill a present public need, but that are totally unsound economically in the long run. I believe it's possible to sell unsound and unfair programs to the public if the pain is placed in the future. Some people don't care about the future as long as they get theirs. Some people won't understand it. Our value system has degenerated to that point. I think it was Hayes in one of the Federalist papers that talked about democracies always crumbling due to what you mentioned. One group finally figures out it can vote itself whatever it wants. Seems like the Democrats are on that road. Repub's tend to vote selfishly too, it's just that they are voting to get government out of their lives (through lower taxes and spending) instead of into it. Richard