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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (216317)	2/7/2013 12:26:00 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542043

Christie Gets Testy About His Weight New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) took on a former White House doctor who said he was at risk of dying in office because of his weight, calling her a "hack" and telling her to "shut up" unless she examines him, ABC News reports. Said Christie: "If she wants to get on a plane and come here to New Jersey and asks me if she wants to examine me and review my medical history, I'll have a conversation with her about that. Until that time she should shut up." First Read: "This is about Christie trying to confront, on his terms, what would be one of his biggest obstacles if he launches a presidential bid in 2016. He knows this is a hurdle; he knows it's not an insignificant one. The biggest thing is he has changed his tone on this, becoming much more open about it, even hinting that he's on a program and that people would notice if it's working relatively soon. As late as last year, Christie's standard response was essentially: my weight is my business, period. Not anymore. If you needed a hint that Christie is trying to get it together to run for president, this is it."

To: JohnM who wrote (216317)	2/7/2013 1:07:06 PM
From: Steve Lokness	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 542043

<<<<<No, it isn’t; we would have come into this crisis with very little debt if the GOP hadn’t always insisted on tax cuts.>>>>> Oh man. While I agree with Krugman about Clintons fine job, once again he so waaaaaaaaaaaay oversimplifies the problem. It's just horse shit to boil this problem down to taxes. Clintons record was highly impacted by the "peace dividend' - and that completely went out the window with 9-11. Additionally, Krugman once again ignore the role of demographics. The baby boomers were in the window of their highest earning years during Clinton. Along with those high incomes came another dividend - short term bump in taxes even if the rates remained the same. Now of course we have just the exact opposite as millions of these high earners revert to retirees sipping single malt scotches on the golf course and paying way less taxes in their retirement. But lordy, those bubble booming scotch drinking golfers also need new knees and hips which has swelled the cost of their health care so the bubble here too has moved from the best of times during Clinton when they were all in their best health to their retirement years when they need more drugs and care to keep them going. Until Krugman addresses all the problems honestly, he is just fomenting more ideological fodder for those on the left.

To: JohnM who wrote (216317)	2/7/2013 3:04:34 PM
From: cosmicforce	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 542043

It is pretty clear that while the first derivative (curve's slope in calculus speak) was negative, but we were and continue to be hi above historic levels of absolute debt since 1975. The fact that we owe 80% of what our country earns as an economy should be a wake-up call for unsustainable spending. If interest rates were to rise, which they inevitably will, the derivative turn sharply positive. When should we sweat it? 100% 200% 500% of GDP. I'm worried now. cf