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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (363804)	12/20/2007 3:30:54 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1578459

JF, > Who knows, maybe. An earlier switch to alt energy might have created some significant business opportunities, and kept more US $'s in US investment. Well that's not really sustaining the Clinton boom. Even so, such a transition would have been a lot more disruptive and difficult than what Al Gore could have been capable of handling, IMO. Too much political pressure to make it easy on the poor and middle class (e.g. Clinton's release of the Strategic Petroleum Reserves when gas hit a "sky high" price of $1.50/gallon). Not to mention pressure from the environmental zealots who will oppose transitional measures such as drilling for our own oil (ANWR) and going nuclear. Tenchusatsu

To: Road Walker who wrote (363804)	12/20/2007 4:11:44 PM
From: American Spirit	Respond to of 1578459

Clinton paid as he went. Bush borrows and spends like there's no tomorrow. Why does Bush do it? Corruption (wanting to privatizing our public wealth and give it to corporate cronies) and in defense of the very wealthy (gradually doing away with progressive taxation). So the rich get richer and everyone else gradually gets screwed, resulting in the end of the Amrican middleclass as we know it. Back to the old robber baron days when families like the Bushes were Lords of the land.