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: Tenchusatsu who wrote (427241)	10/16/2008 8:29:45 PM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572017

CJ is a "true believer".....you are wasting your time trying to prove anything which does not square with the DNC talking points and his warped view of the world....

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (427241)	10/16/2008 9:14:52 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572017

"I think I've provided more than enough to debunk your "fairy tale" accusation and to meet your challenge of "Data. Evidence. Proof. You know, facts."" You have provided some anecdotes. You have provided no evidence that ACORN is involved as an entity. Much less as part of a plot to subvert the election. Or any election. If this was the first election cycle that such claims were made, you'd have some credibility. But, it isn't. The exact same claims have been made for several cycles now. The administration has made voter fraud the top priority of the DOJ. They have even fired US attorney's because the administration felt they should focus more on it. There are what, more than 100 of them? So with 100 offices working for years on an issue with their top priority, how many cases have been filed? If it is a big problem there should be some, shouldn't there? Where are the cases, Tenchu? Where? Are they being kept secret? If so, why? Don't you think your case would be stronger if you could at least give some examples of what is going on? So, we have a situation where a group has been claiming there is a huge problem. When they gain control of the government, they take the main department charged with dealing with it and make it their top priority. They, in fact, fire people because they think those people weren't being diligent enough. Every two years, they shout about how bad the problem is. After almost 8 years of this, they cannot come up with more than a handful of examples that don't even fit the pattern they are warning about. Now, explain why they should be given any more credibility than, say, those who claim that aliens live amongst us? This has all the earmarks of a conspiracy theory, Tenchu. Or a cult. At some point, to support your claims, you need to come up with actual proof. You've had time. You've had the resources. Where are the results, Tenchu? How big is the problem? Show me the numbers. Otherwise, why is this not yet another scam? Why are y'all more credible, or even as credible, than in the past? I am sick and tired of being told, ordered, demanded that I trust that your conspiracies are factual and then when they don't pan out, take your "the intelligence was faulty" and go for it again. For someone with functional brain cells, it is prudent to ask if your intelligence is solid this time around. In other words, prove it.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (427241)	10/17/2008 6:09:58 AM
From: Road Walker	Respond to of 1572017

Let’s Get Fiscal By PAUL KRUGMAN The Dow is surging! No, it’s plunging! No, it’s surging! No, it’s ... Nevermind. While the manic-depressive stock market is dominating the headlines, the more important story is the grim news coming in about the real economy. It’s now clear that rescuing the banks is just the beginning: the nonfinancial economy is also in desperate need of help. And to provide that help, we’re going to have to put some prejudices aside. It’s politically fashionable to rant against government spending and demand fiscal responsibility. But right now, increased government spending is just what the doctor ordered, and concerns about the budget deficit should be put on hold. Before I get there, let’s talk about the economic situation. Just this week, we learned that retail sales have fallen off a cliff, and so has industrial production. Unemployment claims are at steep-recession levels, and the Philadelphia Fed’s manufacturing index is falling at the fastest pace in almost 20 years. All signs point to an economic slump that will be nasty, brutish — and long. How nasty? The unemployment rate is already above 6 percent (and broader measures of underemployment are in double digits). It’s now virtually certain that the unemployment rate will go above 7 percent, and quite possibly above 8 percent, making this the worst recession in a quarter-century. And how long? It could be very long indeed. Think about what happened in the last recession, which followed the bursting of the late-1990s technology bubble. On the surface, the policy response to that recession looks like a success story. Although there were widespread fears that the United States would experience a Japanese-style “lost decade,” that didn’t happen: the Federal Reserve was able to engineer a recovery from that recession by cutting interest rates. But the truth is that we were looking Japanese for quite a while: the Fed had a hard time getting traction. Despite repeated interest rate cuts, which eventually brought the federal funds rate down to just 1 percent, the unemployment rate just kept on rising; it was more than two years before the job picture started to improve. And when a convincing recovery finally did come, it was only because Alan Greenspan had managed to replace the technology bubble with a housing bubble. Now the housing bubble has burst in turn, leaving the financial landscape strewn with wreckage. Even if the ongoing efforts to rescue the banking system and unfreeze the credit markets work — and while it’s early days yet, the initial results have been disappointing — it’s hard to see housing making a comeback any time soon. And if there’s another bubble waiting to happen, it’s not obvious. So the Fed will find it even harder to get traction this time. In other words, there’s not much Ben Bernanke can do for the economy. He can and should cut interest rates even more — but nobody expects this to do more than provide a slight economic boost. On the other hand, there’s a lot the federal government can do for the economy. It can provide extended benefits to the unemployed, which will both help distressed families cope and put money in the hands of people likely to spend it. It can provide emergency aid to state and local governments, so that they aren’t forced into steep spending cuts that both degrade public services and destroy jobs. It can buy up mortgages (but not at face value, as John McCain has proposed) and restructure the terms to help families stay in their homes. And this is also a good time to engage in some serious infrastructure spending, which the country badly needs in any case. The usual argument against public works as economic stimulus is that they take too long: by the time you get around to repairing that bridge and upgrading that rail line, the slump is over and the stimulus isn’t needed. Well, that argument has no force now, since the chances that this slump will be over anytime soon are virtually nil. So let’s get those projects rolling. Will the next administration do what’s needed to deal with the economic slump? Not if Mr. McCain pulls off an upset. What we need right now is more government spending — but when Mr. McCain was asked in one of the debates how he would deal with the economic crisis, he answered: “Well, the first thing we have to do is get spending under control.” If Barack Obama becomes president, he won’t have the same knee-jerk opposition to spending. But he will face a chorus of inside-the-Beltway types telling him that he has to be responsible, that the big deficits the government will run next year if it does the right thing are unacceptable. He should ignore that chorus. The responsible thing, right now, is to give the economy the help it needs. Now is not the time to worry about the deficit.