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 : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (41270)	2/17/2010 2:59:19 PM
From: longnshort	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 71588

I'm for impeaching Obama today however... (Whereas you, by contrast, don't have the guts to impeach him.)

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (41270)	3/1/2010 10:24:33 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

cognitive dissonance nytimes.com… it would be a terrible mistake to borrow against our children’s future to pay our way today That’s Obama telling us that deficit spending for current consumption is a bad idea. I agree. …but WT* !?!? I continue to think that the Republicans should introduce a balanced budget amendment. It should (a) phase in gradually, maybe only taking full effect 15 years out; (b) be override-able by a super majority of both the House and the Senate (say, 80% of each). The former point is so that the voting on it isn’t derailed by catastrophic images of granny going hungry next year. The latter point is so that we’re not forced (”forced”) to repeal it in 10 years when some major hit occurs – the ammendment can survive a massive war, a recession, etc. tjic.com # coyote Says: February 2nd, 2010 at 8:58 am Quote counter-proposal — forget a balanced budget. Set a Constitutional cap on spending as a percent of GDP, with the same override provisions tjic.com