Saturday, 5/12/12, Public Square

12 Comments

Filed under The Public Square

12 responses to “Saturday, 5/12/12, Public Square

  1. WOW! Do you suppose Rupert Murdock is thinking he should clean his act up? Even the Wall Street Journal (which he owns) is telling the truth about government cuts hurting our economy and making unemployment worse. I’m pretty sure he won’t allow this truth to appear on Fox “News” — no, they’ll continue with the lies.

    ———————————–

    Unemployment Rate Without Government Cuts: 7.1%

    One reason the unemployment rate may have remained persistently high: The sharp cuts in state and local government spending in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, and the layoffs those cuts wrought. The unemployment rate would be far lower if it hadn’t been for those cuts: If there were as many people working in government as there were in December 2008, the unemployment rate in April would have been 7.1%, not 8.1%.

    continue reading —
    http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2012/05/08/unemployment-rate-without-government-cuts-7-1/

    • This should be front-page news, and Paul Ryan and his fellow Rand-devotees (the whole Republican Party nowadays) should have to answer for it this fall. While economists and liberals have comprehended the fact that cutting government spending in a recession causes problems for the economy. But now we have data that directly invalidates their screw-you-I’ve-got-mine, libertarian ideology, evidence that is now so undeniably clear that even the pro-austerity Wall Street Journal can’t deny its truth: Budget cuts increase unemployment. This needs to be the mantra of every Democrat running for office this fall, and it should be repeated by every liberal on every Sunday morning talk show. Budget cuts during an economic crisis hurt the economy. This is a truth that liberals should not shy away from, and it needs to be something the Dems in Congress refuse to compromise on: Cutting government spending when we need it most just means people get fired from their jobs–that is its primary effect–and that is a terrible thing to needlessly inflict on a country that’s still reeling from the deepest recession since the Great Depression.

      http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/05/11/1090779/-Even-the-WSJ-admits-it-now-Austerity-has-harmed-the-US-economy

      • indypendent

        And laying off government workers makes the unemployment rate go higher – so it’s a win-win for these Republicans – isn’t it?

        They can blame Obama for not creating jobs and can point to the unemployment rate as evidence…

        Besides – it’s not exactly the past experirence of the Republians to ever shrink government when they are in the White House . And we all know how these same elephants love to spend money …

  2. indypendent

    I just saw this while surfing and thought it might be interesting to post this and see what others think.

    And since it is Mothers Day tomorrow -……it kinda goes with the theme.

    I have no problem with public breast feeding – if done in a dignified way. But I feel some of these breast feedings advocates take things way too far. For instance, I was told that since breast feeding is the natural way to feed a baby – that a woman is entitled to be breast feeding her baby while she is in a restaurant eating her meal.

    So, I would like to pose this question – where is the line drawn between her right to feed her baby and others’ rights if they feel uncomfortable with that woman?

    But this picure – my feeling is if the kid is big enough to stand on a chair to breasts feed – it’s time for the kid to get off the breats.

    But, I’m also the one that says – yes, breast feeding is a normal function in life. Urinating is also a normal function in life – but I don’t do that in public view.

    Besides – I’ve known women whose milk never came in and they were made to feel ‘less than a good mother’ by hospital nurses because they asked for a bottle of formula to feed their crying baby. Several nurses refused to bring a bottle – even after a full day of crying. I guess I am one of those people that believe every woman should be able to choose for herself what to do – and should not be forced into doing something jsut because someone is on a magazine cover promoting it.

    As I said before – this magazine article takes it even further – this is some form of attachment parenting…. AGain, if that is your choice to do – go for it. But it should be not forced on to anyone – and I do give this woman credit for stating that in this article.

    http://moms.today.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/05/11/11658637-time-cover-mom-defends-breast-feeding-3-year-old-son?lite

    • I’m with you totally! It should be the individual mother who chooses. And, boy are you right about those normal functions that are conducted privately.

      I breast-fed my four children. Most of my grandkids were breast fed. I don’t remember a time when I, my daughters and my daughter-in-law didn’t conduct ourselves with decorum.

      • indypendent

        Glad to hear you feel the same way as I do – Is this something from our generation that is showing? We are about the same age – but I don’t remember any mothers breast feeding in public like they do nowadays.

        Now it’s almost like a badge of honor or something. I just don’t get it….

  3. (our friend CF) — “thinks that if you think that Eddie Haskell would make a good President, then Mitt Romney is your guy.”

    Takes me back many long years. My oldest daughter was picked up by a date I’d never met. He couldn’t say enough about our lovely home, yard, dog, even the blouse I was wearing was the most lovely… [eye roll] When he got to my blouse I smiled and said, “Thank you, Eddie.” (His name wasn’t Eddie.) My daughter glared at me, but it went over his head. Perhaps because he couldn’t stop with his ‘high praise,’ which sounded less and less genuine the longer he carried on. She didn’t date him again. In fact, was home early that one and only date. He was too much for anyone to be around for more than a few minutes — very phony. He was from a local monied family (a name you would recognize).

    • indypendent

      All the money in the world could not make me want to spend my life with a guy like that.

      Your daughter was a very wise girl – I suspect she is alot like her mother?

  4. Here’s what happens when you’re unable to learn lessons the past taught. Lessons about the derivative market, lessons about greed, lessons about needed regulations, lessons about the failure of austerity during a financial downturn. Lessons no one in the republican party has yet learned and they prove it by their approval of the Ryan budget plan — they just plan to double down, do exactly what caused our nation’s deepest recession in history faster and harder.

    A bank that is labeled ‘too big to fail’ gets billions of dollars in taxpayer money, and to CONTINUE to fail is absurd. JP Morgan lost $2 billion dollars. That is two thousand million.

    The Lesson of JP Morgan’s $2 Billion Loss: Break Up the Big Banks

    http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/05/the-lesson-of-jp-morgans-2-billion-loss-break-up-the-big-banks/257050/

  5. Of course there was no information about the value of the “blind trusts” on the Romney tax return. That information is not required on the 1040. It is also not required on Form 1041, which would need to be filed by the trusts (maybe). The only tax returns regarding trusts which requires this information, to my knowledge, is the one information return filed annually for split-interest trusts, e.g., charitable remainder/charitable lead trusts.

    • indypendent

      You know, I don’t really care how much money Romney has but what I do care is that he benefited from the American tax system when he bought some of those companies. IIRC – several times Bain Capital used special tax cuts and/or government subsidies when they bought these companies and then swooped down like a vulture to get rid of them.

      THAT is what bothers me – the WAY some of these 1% got their money.

      I wonder how many of the 1% would even be in that group without the help of the taxpayers’ government trough?