When will moderate Republicans revolt against the neocons?

[Kuciwalker]

IIRC, they didn't draft college students, right? Then I have no problem.

[CharlesBHoff]

Originally posted by Kucinich


1) the State can't be sued without its consent, and the only legal recourse for a "breach of contract" would be suit, so the government is completely within its rights and power to cut those programs

2) any "contract" made is no more legally binding than a compaign promise - made by politician of whom many are not even still in office

3) your logic would mean that a decision of this nature could NEVER be undone, whether or not it was the correct decision

Now, obviously some people will get hurt, but if it is ever to be taken down SOMEONE will have to be hurt down the line.

That is one of the nice thing about the Islamist legal system the State and the Caph or Sultan could be sue in his own court by than pirate person and have to appear in court to face charges like anybody elso.

Texas Tech sur the Federal Government for not paying the medical bills of people in the medicalcare programming without the Government permin and won in Federal Court.

[alva]

IIRC, they didn't draft college students, right? Then I have no problem.

from the article :

College and Canada will not be options.

[Kuciwalker]

People can sue the US government too, because there are laws allowing it. However, the very definition of sovereignty implies that you can only be sued without your consent, so this applies to the Caliph as well.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by alva

IIRC, they didn't draft college students, right? Then I have no problem.

from the article :

College and Canada will not be options.

Eww. That's retarded. Didn't they figure out not to do that in WWI?

[CharlesBHoff]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


The man who stayed too long
Don't believe the headline writers -- higher interest rates won't beat inflation. But Alan Greenspan's successor might.

- - - - - - - - - - - -
By James K. Galbraith

May 20, 2004 | Alan Greenspan plays the role of economist, on TV especially, better than any public official who ever lived. But that doesn't mean he is one.

Here is a man who spent the first half of his central-banking career fighting an inflation that did not exist. In so doing, the chairman of the Federal Reserve triggered the stock market crash of 1987, the recession of 1990-1991 and a "preemptive strike" on the dead beast in 1994. He had one period of glory, the late 1990s, when by doing nothing for four years he managed to bring on full employment without inflation. This was against the almost-unanimous received wisdom of the "real" economists, it should be said, and for this Greenspan should always be honored.

But then he blew it. He knew that the Internet bubble was getting out of hand. He held the power to do something about it without raising interest rates, but he declined to act. Let me quote myself here, speaking at the White House Conference on the New Economy in early April 2000:

"For its part, and instead of setting off to fight an inflation that is a pure product of academic imaginations, the Federal Reserve Board could control margin lending. Raising margin requirements is the direct approach to a stock bubble, more targeted than raising interest rates and more effective than jawboning the lenders. If a crash comes, sooner or later, a failure to have acted on margins will weigh on the record, and not for the first time."

Instead, just before and even after the Internet crash, Greenspan raised interest rates -- unsettling the markets and hitting hard at presidential candidate Al Gore. It was the wrong policy, attacking an inflation for which by then not a shred of evidence remained. And then, as the markets tumbled, Greenspan did nothing for six months. Only in December -- just as George W. Bush was anointed -- did he begin to cut rates. And while that surely helped soften the slump, allowing consumers to continue to borrow and spend through the Bush years, it came too late to save the "new economy" from a fiasco costing millions of jobs.

Greenspan has done two other key favors for Team Bush. In 2001, he famously spoke against his own convictions, expressed privately to former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, that without triggers making them conditional on the vanishing surplus, the Bush tax cuts were "irresponsible." (Now he denies having said this, but there is no reason to believe him.) And in recent weeks he has tried to slit the throat of the Social Security program, calling for benefit cuts while supporting making Bush's tax cuts permanent. John Edwards correctly called this an "outrage" at the time, and John Kerry said, "We're simply not going to do it." But Greenspan is a stalking-horse for the next term of President Bush.

Chairman of the board of governors of the Federal Reserve System is truly a wonderful job. Not only is it at the center of power, money, prestige and mystery, but the occupant can do no wrong. He is always praised for the good times, never blamed for the disasters. Nowhere else in American public life is there a position so similar to that of the pope. Or, perhaps, to the president of Mexico, back in the old days: a high priest while in office -- and a complete nonentity as soon as the sash is removed.

Greenspan knows this, of course. For what other reason would he, at 78, choose to linger on in his marble palace? He has survived, after all, the Internet bubble and crash, and four years of stagnation since then. We are in that brief, happy moment that follows the onset of war and that often precedes elections: The country's growth rate is fairly high, and even employment has been rising these past two months. Now, for the first time since Greenspan was last reappointed in 2000, retirement would not imply admission of defeat.

Not only this, but the future isn't rosy. High oil and gas prices are percolating through our structure of costs, generating low-grade but perceptible systemic inflation. The dollar continues to fall against the euro. Meanwhile, China is quite sensibly converting some of its dollars into a strategic petroleum reserve. This and other stockpiling will work to keep oil prices up (always allowing for that promised gift from the Saudis of a few months' price cut just before the election) while further driving the dollar down.

Greenspan is already telling us, as clearly as he ever does, that the Fed will shortly repeat the mistakes of the last oil price shock, back in the 1970s. Faced with inflation -- even just a small amount -- it will raise interest rates. This is called "fighting inflation." The headline writers will say so endlessly, until you almost think it is true. But the effect is just the reverse. As higher rates drain funds from many companies, they will respond by raising their prices even more. Only much later, when the effect of high interest rates is to clobber demand, growth, employment and commodity prices, will inflation finally decrease.

Stock prices rose in 2003 in part because the dollar was falling. Hence U.S. transnational corporations could convert their euro earnings into more dollars, making their earnings look terrific. (No doubt, the administration's cutting the tax rate on dividends also helped.) A rise in rates and the dollar will unravel this effect. And higher rates may also hit the banking sector, depreciating banks' assets (including mortgage-backed securities) while increasing their costs. Will banks respond, as they did in 1994, by increasing their lending? It's doubtful: Pent-up demand for new loans does not appear to be there, as it was 10 years ago.

The outlook, therefore, isn't for another noninflationary boom. It's for stagflation -- the combination of low performance and rising prices some of us dimly remember from the Vietnam War. Thanks to Iraq and his own longevity, Greenspan is now likely to go out on a sour note: the man who stayed too long.

Greenspan will probably retire in 2006, according the arcane rules governing his tenure. But there is one good thing about this reappointment now. It means that President Kerry will be able to place his own man or woman in the job relatively early in his term. But then Kerry will still face the dilemmas Greenspan bequeathed: How to restore the tax system Greenspan helped unravel. How to protect Social Security from the unrelenting Cassandras of whom Greenspan is the ringleader. And how to maneuver between the devil of stagflation and the deep sea of a sinking dollar.

I hate to tell you we have hight inflateion that isnot being reported at all by the media. The El Paso Time printed than story saying food prices in El Paso went up 33% since january 1 to april of this year. Fuel price went up 25% since january1 of this year. See they donot count food price and fuel prices in the CPI.

[chequita guevara]

They do count food and gas, it's just that electronics gadgets are going down.

[The Emperor Fabulous]

Originally posted by Kucinich
IIRC, they didn't draft college students, right? Then I have no problem.

Ah, the usual conservative slogan of "Its fine if it doesn't hurt me"

Women will probably also be drafted. I know someone whose wife is on the local draft board, and that's what plans are if it goes into effect again.

The only way to be safe from the draft now is to be old. How convenient for those in power.

[joncha]

The real question is, if they reinstituted the draft, would OzzyKP fight to lower the draft age?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by The Emperor Fabulous
Ah, the usual conservative slogan of "Its fine if it doesn't hurt me"

How the hell is it conservative? How is it different from the proletariat who vote in their class interest - high taxes on the rich in order to pay for social services for the poor?

No, my response was that it's an acceptable risk, to me, because it wouldn't hurt me

[CharlesBHoff]

Originally posted by Kucinich

Originally posted by The Emperor Fabulous
Ah, the usual conservative slogan of "Its fine if it doesn't hurt me"

How the hell is it conservative? How is it different from the proletariat who vote in their class interest - high taxes on the rich in order to pay for social services for the poor?

No, my response was that it's an acceptable risk, to me, because it wouldn't hurt me

The nice thing about Islam is the 2.5 % tax on wealth muslum to help the poor that make the 4 Great Islam Empire last so long is that tax on anyone who have than net worth greater than the value of 2 ounces(troy ounces) of gold was espect to pay the tax the money was use to help the needly of any religion belief. There are more rules on his.

[chequita guevara]

CBH, your sig assumes the addition of more than 5 billion Moslems to the world population, which, given that the world population is expected to peak at nine billion, isn't going to happen, unless you assume for some reason that billions of people are going to convert to Islam. I don't see that happening.

[Agathon]

Even if you think Kerry is pond scum, what's he going to do that's worse than Bush? Run record deficits? Give illegal aliens a free pass? Throw money at the National Endowment for the Arts

Eh? What's the objection to the last?

Anyway, now is a good time to be on the left. Every morning I get up and Bush has made a boob of himself yet again. I smell blood and so do the Democrats - how long will they let him hang himself before opening up with the full barrage?

I mean, the repugs want to call Kerry a waffler. Hey, let them. Bush is an incompetent, idiotic, warmongering, liar.

Kerry was in two minds on boring tax policy. So what? Bush lied to the world in order to invade a country he didn't know what to do with.

[CharlesBHoff]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
They do count food and gas, it's just that electronics gadgets are going down.

Read the fine print where they say they exclude violabe food and energy cost which can change real fast. The one thing which every person need is food.

[CharlesBHoff]

Originally posted by Kucinich
People can sue the US government too, because there are laws allowing it. However, the very definition of sovereignty implies that you can only be sued without your consent, so this applies to the Caliph as well.

When you make certain people of political post immuse to legal action is than bad thing. All DA are condinate immuse to false arrest suit. One of the condinate being the DA also will free people whom he found didnot comitee than crime. If than DA doesnot act within the condinate immuse the court can remove that immuse so the wrong parties can sue him.