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 : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (59271)	2/13/2009 10:16:55 AM
From: TideGlider	1 Recommendation Respond to of 224750

Like I said BOTH Crooked Judges are Democrats. Fist clue is there is no mention of Party affiliation in the recent articles lol If it were a Republican issue the Party affiliation would have been in BOLD print. … SYSTEM NOT IN NEED REFORM, SAYS CANDIDATE MARK CIAVARELLA,... $2.95 - Wilkes Barre Times Leader - NewsBank - Oct 6, 1995 WILKES-BARRE -- Democratic judicial candidate Mark Ciavarella says public outcry ... criticism of his television ads that aired during the primary election, ... Related web pages HAZLETON JUSTICE SEEKS JUDGE POST WILKES-BARRE -- Hazleton District Justice Michael Conahan, 41, cq said integrity and independence are important qualities of any judge. If elected as Luzerne County Judge he said he will work hard to uphold them. Amid a crowd of family and friends, Conahan, a Democrat, announced Saturday that he would seek election to the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas. The position became open when Judge Bernard Brominski retired. It was temporarily filled last month by lawyer Joseph Musto. Judge... Message 25410196

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (59271)	2/13/2009 11:38:33 AM
From: TimF	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224750

I am reminded that Republicans predicted dire economic consequences for Bill Clinton's deficit-reduction bill in 1993. Both Republicans and Democrats tend to overestimate the effect of relatively ordinary changes in government policy on the economy. US GDP in 1993 was something like $7tril, and there where some strong positive trends going on at that time (some stretching back to the recovery from the early eighties recession, others where recent, or even just beginning to develop). Clinton's tax increase was in the range of tens of billions per year. Any tax increase is going to lay some cost on the economy, but when the underlying economy is strong, and the tax increase isn't truly massive, or very perversely targeted, it can shrug it off. Republicans took the correct idea that tax increases are normally harmful to the economy, and exaggerated it to the idea that any tax increase, of any significance, will always cause severe harm to the economy. That exaggeration was (and still is) incorrect. Which doesn't mean that the tax increases didn't cause harm, but one negative effect in the midst of more powerful positive factors, doesn't typically spell disaster.