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 : Dutch Central Bank Sale Announcement Imminent? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sea_urchin who wrote (18451)	5/30/2003 2:01:24 PM
From: The Vet	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82328

The massive US national debt can never be paid off but is insured until perpetuity by the US government. How would you like to have 300-million people working for you forever? Don't forget the Chinese government have a billion working for them and while they don't pay as much in taxes, they don't get anything like the amount of government handouts either and they are far more compliant.... True in the past the Chinese didn't complete in the technology stakes but now they have it and know how to use it. Not only that but it was given to them free....

To: sea_urchin who wrote (18451)	5/30/2003 2:25:15 PM
From: sea_urchin	Respond to of 82328

> it was Wolfowitz who did the pointing news.independent.co.uk >>>The Bush administration focused on alleged weapons of mass destruction as the primary justification for toppling Saddam Hussein by force because it was politically convenient, a top-level official at the Pentagon has acknowledged. The extraordinary admission comes in an interview with Paul Wolfowitz, the Deputy Defence Secretary, in the July issue of the magazine Vanity Fair. Most striking is the fact that these latest remarks come from Mr Wolfowitz, recognised widely as the leader of the hawks' camp in Washington most responsible for urging President George Bush to use military might in Iraq. The magazine article reveals that Mr Wolfowitz was even pushing Mr Bush to attack Iraq immediately after the 11 September attacks in the US, instead of invading Afghanistan. There have long been suspicions that Mr Wolfowitz has essentially been running a shadow administration out of his Pentagon office, ensuring that the right-wing views of himself and his followers find their way into the practice of American foreign policy. <<<

To: sea_urchin who wrote (18451)	6/3/2003 2:44:20 PM
From: mcg404	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 82328

Searle: <...I don't own a single gold share. Free at last> And odd comment for someone describing their broken dreams...or is that what wisdom sounds like? <does anyone really know what is going on in the US?> Oh sure, i (think i) know. money supply up=inflation People are just (temporarily) confused cause the symptoms of this disease (higher prices) haven't manifested themselves - so far. Of course this assumes debt default doesn't destroy enough money to tilt us towards deflation but the fed has promised us they won't let that happen (and i believe them). <Don't forget a love of and devoted support for George W Bush and a profound hatred of Bill Clinton...> While i was frequently amazed by the visceral hatred of clinton (and hillary too) back when he was in office, i rarely hear a complimentary comment about bush where it isn't qualified in some way. I'm not sure how much love is out there. And the split among republican-leaning types between the neocons and the 'true' conservatives has been amazing to me, it is usually the democrats that are unable to prevent the intra-party squabbling. <I don't like government> Yeah, let's all stipulate that government sucks. But what's the alternative? You seem pretty reasonable for a libertarian (if i can pigeonhole you with that (pejorative) label), so what is your scheme for managing society. I see government as the mechanism by which we try to achieve a balance between the needs of the community and those of the individual. If we eliminate each of our individual impacts on those around us, we could eliminate the need for government. But this can happen only on the day we all start our own self-sufficient homesteads and completely eliminate our need to interact with others. But in a world where we most seem to want to increase their level of specialization (and globalization is just another facet of this), the need for government seems to increase. We increase the need for oversight of all these interaction (regulation) the more we specialize. No? But am i correct in guessing that what really bothers you libertarian types (like it bothers me) is a resentment against a cultural hegemony of which you don't wish to be a part? And the government is simply the mechanism by which this gets forced down your throat? <...and I don't like work.> Hmmm, you don't strike me as lazy...i'm betting you really meant to say you don't like being a participant in the wage slavery model. Or is that just me projecting my beliefs on you? <it was Wolfowitz who did the pointing --- Rumsfelt makes the speeches. And, GWB does what he's told.> Rumsfelt? Hey, what is this man's name. I get yahoo hits on rumsfelt, rumfeld and rumsfield. In any case, the man has always struck me as having a highly selective view of reality. But in the last week, as the missing WMDs story, and the fraud behind it, has gone mainstream I have begun to think that he is his own worst enemy. Seems that the average guy on the street (at least the ones i've spoken with) are feeling more than a little betrayed by this sham - and Rummy has been the front man for it. And at the same time, i'm not sure Rummy 'gets it'. Is it too early to begin to think that this insanity is burning itself out very quickly? John