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 : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (181474)	12/2/2009 4:47:43 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 362992

On the President’s Decision to Increase Our Troop Presence in Afghanistan... WASHINGTON - December 1 - Statement of U.S. Senator Russ Feingold: “I do not support the president’s decision to send additional troops to fight a war in Afghanistan that is no longer in our national security interest. It’s an expensive gamble to undertake armed nation-building on behalf of a corrupt government of questionable legitimacy. Sending more troops could further destabilize Afghanistan and, more importantly, Pakistan, a nuclear-armed state where al Qaeda is headquartered. While I appreciate that the president made clear we won’t be in Afghanistan forever, I am disappointed by his decision not to offer a timetable for ending our military presence there. I will work with members of both parties and both houses of Congress to push for a flexible timetable to reduce our troop levels in Afghanistan, as part of a comprehensive strategy to combat al Qaeda in the region and around the world.” Earlier today, Senator Feingold was joined by Representatives Jim McGovern (D-MA), Walter Jones (R-NC) and Barbara Lee (D-CA) in voicing opposition to a troop increase for Afghanistan. Video of Senator Feingold’s remarks is available at youtube.com.

To: koan who wrote (181474)	12/3/2009 12:30:01 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 362992

YOu are not understanding the depression background changes things until we get out of it. Then we can tighten up. Not now. They gave hundreds of billions to banks for almost nothing. They are loaning money to banks for nothing, so they effect a dollar carry trade and makes up to 40 times the money leveraging trads. Sorry, koan, you can't take that attitude. We are talking about houses....a very long term purchase. If someone can not afford a house, then they need not to own one. Lowering interest rates artificially to make them eligible is a fool's gambit as we have seen all too painfully during the past two years. The banks are gambling with the money again. Loans do nto make as much as derivatives, CDS's or CDO's. They are lending. How do you think people are buying homes? Last month, housing sales were at their highest for the year. While the middle class struggles. They could have run the money through the middle class via mortgage help, to help them out during this moment of need. And the banks still woul dhave gotten the money. Kill two birds with one stone. When we are out of the hole tehn we tighten up. The econmic expansion of WWII pulled us out of the depression with full employment. Basic Keynsian economics. So you are proposing we go to war?