This country cannot afford another 4-8 years of economic mediocrity. McCain's current platform clearly shows he abandoned his more sensible liberal positions of the past for the republican party line on taxes, economics, and military spending.
Democratic presidents preside over stronger economic growth, including but not limited to higher growth in GDP, employment, the stock market, corporate profits and compensation. Obama will be no different in that sense as he will generate billions in additional tax revenue while cutting taxes more than McCain for over 80% of families (with AGI over $10k/py). [Tax Policy Center] This puts tax cuts where they have the most effect, in the hands of those with a higher marginal propensity to consume and higher overall marginal utility per tax dollar saved. [Presidential Economics] [Adler & Lebang]
The downside to economic growth is obviously the rising inflation and interest. However, the solution to reducing inflation and interest seems to be gridlock, not a Republican president.
What this country needs right now is a strong economic expansion which is more likely to come from Obama, and if interest rates and inflation rise too high, we'll need gridlock, but that should be in the form of a Republican congress and democratic president.
For example, look no further than the after tax income distributions of the candidates tax plans, which were debated in detail at todays Tax Policy Center between the Senior Economic Advisers of the Obama and McCain campaign:
Which one do you think will benefit the economy more? The one which puts cash in the hands of those with a higher marginal utility per tax dollar saved while adding billions more to the revenue base, or the one which concentrates the bulk where the marginal utility is the least while adding 100 billion to the debt each year?
What part of your childhood do you miss the most?
Submitted by Maretta.
There are lots of things to choose from here. I will just make a list:
- Lack of real responsibility.
- Living for free.
- Running for the sake of running. This is a big one for me. Now that I am near 40, I don't know that I would run if a pack of dogs were on me. As a kid, I remember running just to run...big smile on my face, laughing exuberantly.
- Ample time to do things you want to do. Now life seems to be bogged down with "have to do" stuff.
- Being the kid in the family instead of the parent. There is a huge difference.
All of that being said, I think the thing I miss most is the level of joy that kids can achieve. As adults, we become jaded, we have experienced more things and we are too damned tired to have that level of excitement anymore.
last week, a federal ruling/reversal sets a dangerous precedent - oh, what's that you say? - another one? - yeah - well, get used to it
http://www.iht.com//articles/2008/07/20/opinion/edmarri.php?WT.mc_id=newsalert
Opinion
The White House wins a disturbing legal victory
The Bush administration has been a waging a fierce battle for the power to lock people up indefinitely simply on the president's say-so. It scored a disturbing victory last week when a federal appeals court ruled that it could continue to detain Ali al-Marri, who has been held for more than five years as an enemy combatant. The decision gives the president sweeping power to deprive anyone - citizens as well as noncitizens - of their freedom. The Supreme Court should reverse this terrible ruling.
Al-Marri, a citizen of Qatar legally residing in the United States, was initially arrested in his home in Peoria, Illinois, on ordinary criminal charges, then imprisoned by military authorities.
The government, which says he has ties to Al Qaeda, designated him an enemy combatant, even though it never alleged that he was in an army or carried arms on a battlefield. He was held on the basis of extremely thin hearsay evidence.
Last year, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, based in Richmond, Virginia, declared that the government could not hold al-Marri, or any other civilian, simply on the president's orders. If it wanted to prosecute him, the court ruled, it could do so in the civilian court system.
That was the right answer. Unfortunately, last week the full 4th Circuit reversed the decision, and with a tangle of difficult-to-decipher opinions, upheld the government's right to hold al-Marri indefinitely. The court ruled that al-Marri must be given greater rights to challenge his detention. But this part of the decision is weak, and he is unlikely to get the sort of procedural protections necessary to ensure that justice is done.
The implications are breathtaking. The designation "enemy combatant," which should apply only to people captured on a battlefield, can now be applied to people detained inside the United States. Even though al-Marri is not a U.S. citizen, the court's reasoning appears to apply equally to citizens.
Equally troubling, the ruling supports President George W. Bush's ludicrous argument that when Congress authorized the use of force against those responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks, it gave the president essentially unlimited powers. If a president ever wants to round up Americans on vague charges and detain them indefinitely, this ruling gives him a dangerous green light.
Al-Marri's lawyers say they will ask the Supreme Court to review the ruling. Without doubt, it should. The case raises critically important issues for a free society, and the 4th Circuit's convoluted set of opinions is too confusing to give proper guidance to other courts, the executive branch, or the people.
The jumble reflects how badly the administration has butchered the law in this area. People accused of bad deeds should be tried in court - not in sham proceedings. They should be put in jail - not in secret detention. If they are not proved guilty, they should be set free. It is up to the Supreme Court to restore these principles of American justice.
Only poop at work. This hack seems small but it's benefits are many. First, and most obvious, you get paid to poop. Second, you gain free time not pooping off the clock. Additionally, you can avoid the unenviable task of washing your toilets. One other benefit most people overlook is that the practice helps keep one regular. Since most people have very rigid and regular work schedules, a schedule develops, and too much deviation from that schedule is highly discouraged. Then there are the intangibles such as the fun of having a secret game and the feeling of superiority you'll have over your colleagues and employers.
Some of you may have made the logical leap to the extreme of this system, trying to maximize the amount of pooping at work. This course is dangerous and I do not recommend pursuing it. However, this tack can be tangentially explored through the maximization of the bathroom visit. Strategies of this type include meticulous hygiene and adornment in unwieldy accouterments.
Enjoy!
For the record, I’m not moonlighting, though I do work for two separate companies. It’s a bit complicated, but not very interesting, so I won’t bore you with the details, suffice to say my current job’s only a part of my other job. Anyway, in my other job I work with people who know people who can find out things and last week I had them looking into something surrounding my car’s unfortunate accident. I was a bit too traumatised last Monday, having seen the wreck, but I had a long time between sweeping a few halls and fixing a fried fuse box on Tuesday to do some pondering. Remember the mysterious shoulder pain I mentioned? It’s persisted ever since and feels very reminiscent of an old injury. I lived in London for a while when I first started my other job and was taking some self-defence classes (which I recommend to any of you planning a holiday there in the near future). We were practicing a figure-four arm-lock when my training partner got a little over-zealous and dislocated my shoulder. Ouch. Fortunately it was patched up pretty quickly and was fine after only a few days (the painkillers helped). Then, a few years ago, I took a clumsy spill out of a third-storey window and landed on that same shoulder. Unfortunately, medical care was somewhat lacking where I was and I had to put it back in myself. Ouch! How it feels now very much reminds me of how it felt then. That got to me to thinking that maybe I might’ve been in the car after all. And if so, I must’ve been driving, because there is no way I’d have survived what happened to the passenger side. After work I called back at the junkyard to have a talk with the owner, under the premise of having left something in the car. I thought it was a bit odd that, so soon after a crash, my car had been towed away for scrap. I’d have thought an accident investigator would’ve wanted to have a look at it. “I’ve been towing stuff for the police for years,” he tells me. “Some police woman calls me and tells me to tow a wreck, so I tows the wreck.” “About what time was that?” He shrugs. “After midnight?” Why’s he asking me? I know if I was called out on a job on a Friday midnight, I’d be a lot more curious and a lot less blasé, but I let it go. And so, to my car, and the thing that was bothering me. I’d noticed a spot of blood on what was left of the near-side door when I saw it on the Monday, which I just assumed belonged to whoever had pinched it, but I couldn’t remember seeing any inside. If someone was in the passenger seat, surely there’d be a mess? I sneakily scraped off the blood (not that the yard-owner was paying any attention) to hand over to someone in my other job to hand over to someone to take a look at. Came back on Saturday with a big, fat bugger-all. Literally. Nothing. So now the question is; what is somebody who doesn’t exist doing bleeding on my car after it’s been battered? My pondering continues.
Traditional Judeo-Christian morality tells us to love our neighbors. Most of us, whether religous or not, would agree with this moral sentiment. But, if we are to love everyone, then is this really "love"? There is a sense in which "love" loses the power it is suppose to contain.
So, are we really suppose to love everyone? Is that even possible? Should we really "love" strangers and our enemies? Is it moral to "love" so inclusively? Wow....that just sounded whorish. Whorish morality anyone?
After failing to make s'more pie, I am nervous while hearing the noise from a borrowed ice cream maker...
Am I ready to accept a failed chocolate sorbet?...
Right after my recital on August 8th, I'll just cook massive Korean food which I am pretty darn good at!
I recently bought a book called The Book of Life by Jiddu Krishnamurti. This book has a meditation for every single day of the year. When reading the ones for July, I found some that really grabbed me. This one is titled Understanding Suffering.
Why do we inquire, "what is happiness?" Is that the right approach? Is that the right probing? We are not happy. If we were happy, our world would be entirely different; our civilization, our culture would be wholly, radically different. We are unhappy human beings, petty , miserable, struggling, vain, surrounding ourselves with useless, futile things, satisfied with petty ambitions, with money, and position. We are unhappy beings, though we may have knowledge, though we may have money, rich houses, plenty of children, cars, experience. We are unhappy, suffering, human beings, and because we are suffering, we want happiness, and so we are led away by those who promise this happiness--social, economic, or spiritual....
What is the good of my asking if there is happiness when I am suffering? Can I understand suffering? That is my problem, not how to be happy. I am happy when I am not suffering, but the moment I am conscious of it, it is not happiness....So I must understand what is suffering. Can I understand what is suffering when a part of my mind is running away seeking happiness, seeking a way out of this misery? So must I not, if I am to understand suffering, be completely one with it, not reject it, not justify it, not condemn it, not compare it, but completely be with it and understand it?
The truth of what is happiness will come if I know how to listen. I must know how to listen to suffering; if I can listen to suffering I can listen to happiness, because that is what I am.
My Groups
-
Freethinkers Updated: Yesterday
-
Atheists Updated: Yesterday
-
Libertarians Updated: Yesterday
Neighborhood
Explore friends, family, friends & family, or entire neighborhood.
