<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Brad,<br>
<br>
Are you getting receipt acknowledgments when you post to the list?<br>
<br>
The list is going on and off line as I tinker.<br>
<br>
I know Michael does these things in the middle of the night, but we're
working then.<br>
<br>
B.<br>
<br>
OOps -- I see the list is now replying to individuals not back to the
list.<br>
<br>
I'll be back.<br>
<br>
B.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Brad Haslett wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:400985d70901290719h7f8bcb39od5422a18a9e486f3@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Bill,
The table came through on your post - can't explain that one.
As Rik pointed out, we're not to far from the law of diminishing
returns taking effect. We can't borrow our way out of having borrowed
too much money, unless of course you use inflation as a means to
devalue your debt. To my knowledge, we haven't cut any government
entitlements yet, so the 38% who don't pay taxes anyway have yet to
suffer much, yet. Is a revolution in the cards? Of course it is,
especially for China. The difference is, they have the reserves to
spend in order to head a revolution off, we have only the option to
borrow for more time.
>From a purely political point of view, why should the Obama crowd care
one wit whether the minority party joins in this exercise or not? As
The One said himself to the minority whip Eric Cantor, "I won. I'm
trumping you on that". Trump away O'Messiah! You'll either be a hero
or a goat, why share the glory? - unless of course, you're not all
that sure it will work.
We may very well be at the tipping point as a Republic. Margaret
Thatcher once said, "socialism sounds great until you run out of other
peoples money".
Brad
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 8:57 AM, Bill Effros <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:bill@effros.com"><bill@effros.com></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Brad,
Missing a table.
Doesn't matter. Nobody will really repay it anyhow--everybody will repay
it--sort of.
How does the country absorb the cost of all the people who won't have jobs?
Stock market losses. Home losses. Pension losses.
Most Americans simply won't be able to live as well in the future as they
did in the past. This would be true with or without government
intervention.
Granted, the current "stimulus" package is silly. That's not what it is, at
all. It's really welfare.
But you get revolutions if you don't care for the masses in times of need.
So what should we do?
You can't let them starve in the streets--next thing you know you'll get a
Typhoid Fever epidemic and calls to spend your money on universal health
care.
Bill Effros
Letters to the Editor wrote:
How much will it cost?
You've heard numbers tossed around about how much the "stimulus" bill
will cost each taxpayer, but how much will it cost you personally?
First, determine what percentage tax payer you are - here's a rough
guide (total household income) -
Top 1% $~350,000
Top 5% $~150,000
Top 10% $~100,000
Top 25% $~64,000
Top 50% $~31,000
Next, find your percentage bracket in the attached table - that's how
much the government is going to borrow and how much YOU will repay,
plus interest.
Remember, only 5% of the spending is for infrastructure. If you're in
the bottom 50%, this is a no-brainer -your rebates will offset your
indebtedness by more than 10 fold.
Joe the Plumber got it right!
Brad
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Brad Haslett <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:flybrad@gmail.com"><flybrad@gmail.com></a> wrote:
Congratulations to the opposition party for growing a pair (even
though that may not apply to my Congressman Marsha Blackburn).
Taylor, a Blue Dog Democrat from my adopted district of Gulf Coast
Mississippi and Cooper, a Dem as well from East Tennessee both voted
nay.
Now it's on to the Senate to see how much more can be added to this
socialist spending bill with some highways thrown in for good measure.
I suggest the minority Senators filibuster - just reading the damn
thing on the floor should suffice.
Would you like fries with that CrapSandwich?
Brad
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 10:25 AM, Letters to the Editor
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:swiftwatergazette@mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com"><swiftwatergazette@mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com></a> wrote:
You're beating a dead horse here.
Many of us have said the same thing for years. To no avail.
Pat Buchanan (whether you agree with him or not you've got to acknowledge
THIS man knows how to write a speech) quoted somebody saying "Where there is
no solution, there is no problem." An interesting perspective.
I see no solution to the current situation. Politically it's impossible to
admit this and win elections, so you get a lot of silly stuff on the road to
the inevitable.
B.
Letters to the Editor wrote:
Bill,
Speaking of W's problems, I'm attaching an article from 2005. Where
the hell did THAT money go? So let me get this right: Republican
pork is bad but doubling down with Democratic pork is good? Is there a
new party on the horizon? Is it time we started the Sanity party?
The world has gone mad!
Brad
-----------------
The Republican pork barrel
By Jeff Jacoby, Globe Columnist | August 4, 2005
AT $286.4 BILLION, the highway bill just passed by Congress is the
most expensive public works legislation in US history. In addition to
funding the interstate highway system and other federal transportation
programs, it sets a new record for pork-barrel spending, earmarking
$24 billion for a staggering 6,376 pet projects, spread among
virtually every congressional district in the land. The enormous bill
-- 1,752 pages long -- wasn't made public until just before it was
brought to a vote, and so, as The New York Times noted, ''it is safe
to bet that none of the lawmakers, not even the main authors, had read
the entire package."
That didn't stop them from voting for it. It passed 412 to 8 in the
House, 91 to 4 in the Senate.
Huge as the bill was, it wasn't quite huge enough for Representative
Don Young of Alaska, chairman of the House Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee. ''It's not as big as what he'd like," a
committee spokesman said, ''but is still a very good bill and will
play a major role in addressing transportation and highway needs."
One wonders what more Young could have wanted. The bill funnels upward
of $941 million to 119 earmarked projects in Alaska, including $223
million for a mile-long bridge linking an island with 50 residents to
the town of Ketchikan on the mainland. Another $231 million is
earmarked for a new bridge in Anchorage, to be named -- this is
specified in the legislation -- Don Young's Way. There is $3 million
for a film ''about infrastructure that demonstrates advancements in
Alaska, the last frontier." The bill even doffs its cap to Young's
wife, Lu: The House formally called it ''The Transportation Equity Act
-- a Legacy for Users," or TEA-LU.
Christmas didn't come early just for Alaska. Meander through the
bill's endless line items and you find a remarkable variety of
''highway" projects, many of which have nothing to do with highways:
Horse riding facilities in Virginia ($600,000). A snowmobile trail in
Vermont ($5.9 million). Parking for New York's Harlem Hospital ($8
million). A bicycle and pedestrian trail in Tennessee ($532,000). A
daycare center and park-and-ride facility in Illinois ($1.25 million).
Dust control mitigation for rural Arkansas ($3 million). The National
Packard Museum in Ohio ($2.75 million). A historical trolley project
in Washington ($200,000). And on and on and on.
If Carl Sandburg had lived to see this massive avalanche of bacon
greasing its way down Capitol Hill, he would have named Congress, not
Chicago, the hog butcher for the world. Or perhaps he would simply
have seconded P.J. O'Rourke's timeless observation in ''Parliament of
Whores": ''Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey
and car keys to teenage boys."
Arizona Senator John McCain, who voted no, called the bill a
''monstrosity" and wondered whether it will ever be possible to
restore fiscal sanity to Congress. If ''the combination of war, record
deficits, and the largest public debt in the country's history" can't
break lawmakers' addiction to spending, he asked, what can? ''It would
seem that this Congress can weather any storm thrown at it, as long as
we have our pork life-saver to cling to."
McCain is a Republican, and it might surprise younger readers to learn
that spending discipline was once a basic Republican principle. Hard
to believe in this era of bloated Republican budgets and the
biggest-spending presidential administration in 40 years -- but true.
Once upon a time Republicans actually described themselves with pride
as fiscal conservatives. That was one of the reasons they opposed the
promiscuous use of pork-barrel earmarks, which are typically used to
bypass legislative standards, reward political favorites, and assert
political control over state and local affairs.
For example, Ronald Reagan vetoed the 1987 highway bill because it
included 121 earmarks and was $10 billion over the line he had drawn
in the sand. ''I haven't seen this much lard since I handed out blue
ribbons at the Iowa State Fair," he said. President Bush is a great
admirer of Reagan's record in foreign affairs. Too bad he shows so
little interest in following the Gipper's fiscal lead as well.
When Bush ran for president in 2000, he described his Democratic
opponent, Vice President Al Gore, as a reckless high-roller who would
unbalance the budget. ''If the vice president gets elected," Bush
said, ''the era of big government being over is over."
Five years later, what is over is the GOP reputation for fiscal
sobriety. Republicans today are simply the other big-government party
-- just as capable of squandering public funds, and just as eager to
fill barrels with pork, as their fellow-spendthrifts across the aisle.
Jeff Jacoby's e-mail address is <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:jacoby@globe.com">jacoby@globe.com</a>.
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 9:48 AM, Letters to the Editor
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:swiftwatergazette@mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com"><swiftwatergazette@mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com></a> wrote:
No doubt it's pork barrel spending by another name.
But there isn't enough money in the universe to make it work, and no place
left to take it from.
Everyone will tap dance for a while, after which it will no longer be W's
problem.
When Caterpillar cuts 20,000 jobs the problem is far greater than currency
manipulation.
Talk about fiddling while Rome burns...
On the other hand, maybe they do less damage this way.
B.
Letters to the Editor wrote:
Bill,
Only 45 billion is slated for infrastructure. To put that into
perspective, 120 billion was allocated for Katrina recovery. The last
time I checked (about a year ago), roughly 70% of that money had been
spent - enough to provide two 2000 square foot houses with a brand new
SUV in each driveway for every family displaced by Katrina. There's
roughly 400,000 people in NOLA and another 80,000 STILL displaced by
Katrina. Forgive me for being a bit skeptical that 45 billion doing
much for infrastructure.
This is pure pork politics and a poorly disguised attempt to buy the
next election, as if there wasn't enough money spent on the last
election for The One to say "I won".
You're dead-on right about Hoover and most certainly correct about
inflation. Hoover tried to engage in trade protectionist policies and
it made the Great Depression much worse. Our new Tax Cheat in charge,
Geitner, ran his mouth off against the Chinese about manipulating
their currency (we all know they do it but you're not supposed to make
them lose face over it) and they showed Geitner and Obama who's really
in charge by running the RNB down the max range overnight. I guess the
Chinese really do live by the Golden Rule; he who has the gold makes
the rules.
Never underestimate the stupidity of collective behavior.
Brad
On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 8:37 AM, Letters to the Editor
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:swiftwatergazette@mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com"><swiftwatergazette@mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com></a> wrote:
Brad,
The only way the recession will be over by 2010 is if people start
calling it by its true name. This is a depression. It's nothing like
the cyclical hiccups we have seen since the end of WWII.
The current governmental thrashing is pointless, except to the extent
that the Democrats will have to accept responsibility for the
situation. The next Republican presidential candidate will run on the
slogan "Are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?"
Let's hope some of this money goes to useful stuff. I never thought I
would get as much use out of the Interstate Highway Program when it was
first proposed. Now I regard it as almost a miracle of convenience.
I'd love to see NYC get money for its subway system.
Our children won't pay for this stuff, we will. Our kids will pay back
these debts with massively inflated cheap dollars. The standard of
living of older people will fall as their retirement savings are worth
less and less in inflated terms. Burger flippers will make $50,000 a
year, while retirees will grumble about how it gets harder and harder to
make ends meet.
Serves us right.
I can't figure out how to put an end to the depression without a war to
soak up excess capacity and reduce population while destroying
manufacturing over-capacity.
I haven't seen where anyone else has figured it out, either.
Obama is employing the same strategies as Herbert Hoover.
Bill Effros
Letters to the Editor wrote:
Well Boys and Girls, by the time you read this the vote may be over -
The Great Generational Theft Act of 2009 may be law. The children of
the Greatest Generation can't stomach a single downturn in the
business cycle after two decades of prosperity, unbridled borrowing on
over-inflated assets, and uncontrolled spending. So these spoiled
brats want more borrowing, more spending (only this time were going to
let Washington, DC do the spending), and anything but short term pain
and suffering for a condition of our own making - let our children and
grandchildren pay for our sins. Our new President says we must put
politics aside and then tells the opposition party, "I won", when
challenged on the wisdom of borrowing $825 Billion (over a TRILLION)
with interest. Most (80%) of this money won't be spent until after
2010 when the recession should be over anyway, so this isn't really
about economics, its pure pork politics, plain and simple. People
truly do get the government they deserve.
Disgusting!
Brad
_______________________________________________
SwiftwaterGazette mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:SwiftwaterGazette@mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com">SwiftwaterGazette@mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette">http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette</a>
_______________________________________________
SwiftwaterGazette mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:SwiftwaterGazette@mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com">SwiftwaterGazette@mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette">http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette</a>
_______________________________________________
SwiftwaterGazette mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:SwiftwaterGazette@mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com">SwiftwaterGazette@mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette">http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette</a>
_______________________________________________
SwiftwaterGazette mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:SwiftwaterGazette@mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com">SwiftwaterGazette@mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette">http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette</a>
_______________________________________________
SwiftwaterGazette mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:SwiftwaterGazette@mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com">SwiftwaterGazette@mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette">http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette</a>
_______________________________________________
SwiftwaterGazette mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:SwiftwaterGazette@mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com">SwiftwaterGazette@mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette">http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette</a>
________________________________
________________________________
_______________________________________________
SwiftwaterGazette mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:SwiftwaterGazette@mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com">SwiftwaterGazette@mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette">http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette</a>
_______________________________________________
SwiftwaterGazette mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:SwiftwaterGazette@mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com">SwiftwaterGazette@mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette">http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>