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: Alighieri who wrote (587786)	9/28/2010 11:02:40 AM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 1571418

Obama’s Stand in the Schoolhouse Door from Big Government by Phillip Stutts Another town hall meeting, another embarrassing gaffe by President Obama. But this time, the President’s honesty revealed an arrogant defiance toward poor, mostly African-American parents trying to provide a better life for their children. While President Obama was conducting a town hall meeting on MSNBC this morning with Matt Lauer, he was asked (by a parent in the crowd) if he thought his children could get the same education in a DC Public School vs. the elite private school he sends them to now. His bombshell hypocritical answer caused no ripple and nary a peep from the national media. What a shock… The following is an abbreviated transcript via the NBCWashington.com. Parent Kelly Burnett: “I wanted to know if Malia and Sasha would get the same high-quality, rigorous education in a D.C. public school as compared to their very elite private academy they’re attending now?” President Obama: “I’ll be blunt with you. The answer is ‘no’ right now,” Obama said. “The D.C. Public School systems are struggling. They have made some important strides over the past several years to move in the direction of reform. There are some terrific individual schools in the D.C. system…. “I’ll be very honest with you. Given my position, if I wanted to find a great public school for them to be in, we could probably maneuver to do it. The broader problem is that for a mom or dad who are working hard and who don’t have a bunch of connections, don’t have a lot of choice in where they live, they should be getting the same quality education for their kids as anybody else.” An amazing moment since President Obama killed the DC Opportunity Scholarship program last year and denied 216 low-income parents from sending their children to a better school. These 216 kids are being forced to attend a poor performing public school – something Obama doesn’t impose on his own children. And why would he? But this spit-in-your-face hypocrisy is not only jaw dropping, it’s incredibly sad for the 216 D.C. parents who don’t have the power of the Presidency to force a better education onto their children. Education reform is finally gaining its legs with the release of David Guggenheim’s documentary “Waiting for Superman”. But this movement is not about putting one foot in and keeping the other out. We must be all-in to save the next generation. I only wish the question today came from a parent of the 216 he denied in the schoolhouse door. What a shameful moment for our President and this country. biggovernment.com

To: Alighieri who wrote (587786)	9/28/2010 11:19:54 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571418

There are studies with all sorts of different conclusions depending on what time frame you look at, what other factors you account for, how you account for them, and other parts of the study. Whatever multiplier you like, from negative to over one and a half, maybe even over 2, you can find support in the economic literature. There is no authoritative answer even for specific past events where we have as much information as we are ever likely to have, much less for the current situation, where any estimates of the multiplier are just guesses. The CBO makes the guess it likes and find supports for it (like it could find support for many other multiplier estimates), or it take the particular types of studies it likes and just grabs whatever multiplier they give. Then it plugs that in to its model, with a positive multiplier, in particular a multiplier above one, the model is then going to show a benefit every single time its run. Its not a measurement of the real economy. Its a simplistic model, that bears little relationship with the real economy, that produces a predetermined conclusion.