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 : John McCain for President -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RetiredNow who wrote (4110)	10/13/2008 12:54:50 PM
From: Little Joe	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6579

I am not a Republican. It is amazing what you hear as opposed to what is said. Obama has been saying that 95% will get a tax cut and that families earning up to 250K will get a tax break. I have been hearing that as 95% of people would pay no taxes. Funny how my mind worked on that one. Nonetheless, even if only those families who make less than 250 K are exempted from taxes, my question is still valid. Since no where near a majority of Americans have family income of 250K, a very large percentage of Americans will not pay taxes. My point is that will have the effect of turning them into freeloaders and I think that is a bad idea, even if it will reduce my taxes. What incentive would a person have to control the rate of taxes if he or she doesn't pay them. Hell, I thought it was partriotic to pays taxes, or maybe it is patriotic only for the well off to pay taxes. Your statement that 5%of Americans were voting themselves anything is ridiculous. You could argue that they benefited disproportionately, but they did not vote themselves anything. The sad thing is that we as a nation, inflicted this on ourselves and the sooner we begin to take responsibility for ourselves the better off we will be. Little joe

To: RetiredNow who wrote (4110)	10/13/2008 2:26:48 PM
From: puborectalis	Respond to of 6579

MARKETWATCH FIRST TAKE Liberal media rejoice! Krugman wins a Nobel Commentary: New York Times columnist cited for economic research By Jon Friedman, MarketWatch Last update: 2:17 p.m. EDT Oct. 13, 2008Comments: 10Editor's note: The following First Take is real-time analysis and opinion by the MarketWatch commentary team. NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- Paul Krugman, poster child for the so-called liberal media, is getting the last laugh. The columnist for the New York Times (NYT:New York Times Company was awarded the Nobel prize in economics on Monday. Krugman, who has represented the Times since 1999, was lauded for his theories on how urbanization can have an impact on trade patterns. That's the official explanation, anyway, of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. The real story is that the acknowledgement of the liberal media and its accomplishments at a time when Barack Obama is enjoying a solid lead against John McCain, his Republican rival, in the presidential-election opinion polls. One of the hallmarks of the McCain-Palin ticket has been to browbeat the "elite" media. Krugman's award underscores the credibility of the Times columnist and many of his like-minded colleagues. Krugman, a Princeton University professor, is a relentless and articulate critic of President Bush's economic policies -- and he hasn't spared McCain, either, in his writing. Krugman has written: "We've known for a long time, of course, that Mr. McCain doesn't know much about economics -- he's said so himself, although he's also denied having said it," Krugman wrote in a recent column. "That wouldn't matter much if he had good taste in advisers -- but he doesn't." It is easy to discern where Krugman's personal political beliefs lie. The Nobel, however, is awarded on merit, not because of political opinions. Krugman has done very solid work for a long time. He deserves the award -- on merit. -- Jon Friedman, columnist