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: i-node who wrote (695411)	1/26/2013 1:21:26 AM
From: d[-_-]b	Respond to of 1574495

Feral Hog eradication. This is a 10 minute action packed video of a helicopter feral hog eradication flight on the Brazos River in central Texas. These non-native wild pigs breed incredibly fast and cause thousands of dollars of property damage. Freedom Aviation (www.freedomav.com) was able to safely and efficiently remove nearly 150 wild pigs in less than 4 flight hours.

To: i-node who wrote (695411)	1/26/2013 12:40:28 PM
From: bentway	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574495

Krugman: January 24, 2013, 2:46 pm 157 Comments Tim Geithner Is Wrong But he’s right, too. He has a very interesting interview with Liaquat Ahamed; I was struck by what he says about the fiscal outlook: TG: There’s something strange about the debate today. The magnitude of additional deficit reduction – revenue increases or spending cuts – that you need to lock in in order to achieve fiscal sustainability is pretty modest. By most accounting, because of what we’ve already done on the spending side and tax side, we have to find another ¾ of 1 percent of GDP of policy measures. And if we did that, that would achieve the economist test of sustainability, meaning it would get the deficit down to a modest primary surplus so the debt would start falling as a share of GDP. That’s basically consistent with the CBPP analysis: 3/4 of a percent over the next decade is around $1.5 trillion. It’s important to note that this same analysis suggests that it’s not a disaster if we don’t take any more deficit-reduction steps: instead of stabilizing the debt at around 73 percent of GDP, it rises to around 80 percent, which isn’t great but isn’t cause for panic. Where Geithner goes wrong is in suggesting that since what should be done over the next decade is fairly modest, we ought to be able to get bipartisan agreement. I don’t know if he really believes this or just feels that it’s what he has to say, but nobody who has actually been paying attention can take this seriously. To say what should be obvious: Republicans don’t care about the deficit. They care about exploiting the deficit to pursue their goal of dismantling the social insurance system. They want a fiscal crisis; they need it; they’re enjoying it. I mean, how is “starve the beast” supposed to work? Precisely by creating a fiscal crisis, giving you an excuse to slash Social Security and Medicare. The idea that they’re going to cheerfully accept a deal that will take the current deficit off the table as a scare story without doing major damage to the key social insurance programs, and then have a philosophical discussion about how we might change those programs over the longer term, is pure fantasy. That would amount to an admission of defeat on their part. Now, maybe we will get that admission of defeat. But that’s what it will be — not a Grand Bargain between the parties, acting together in the nation’s interest.