jackson33

ecoli; No, I was trying to separate Energy as an equal to a product. I have no problems with energy being regulated to the degree it is and because it most certainly does not fall into any category of 'Free Markets'... I am not an advocate for corn ethanol, think it is/was a mistake and if left up to industry, the same thing could be produced at less cost, less intrusive into food products and not require subsidies. As for tax deductions or other incentives to use green technology, enviromental friendly products and especially costly autos/truck or fuel systems where applicable (Electric delivery trucks/cabs etc), I have no problem. In fact I don't have any problem with the environmental movements, so long as common sense prevails. This would be allowing the current systems to exist, operate, be renewed until alternative methods are viable competitors. IMO, those viable competitors are non existent today, at least in current forms and will develop in some garage. iNow; Power loss/waste, is still a major problem and up to 7-8% from many generators to the consumer. I still feel when home/building power storage becomes a reality, rather than the continuous streaming of a power source, efficiency will increase in the thousands of percent. As for Republican's, its still government to me. I do believe Republican's had tended to restrain government size more than Democrats, Johnson or Carter, opposed to Nixon/Reagan/Bush I, but will NOT argue they decreased anything. No, demographics or if you prefer discretionary income, always plays a roll in product production and or distribution. Your going to produce a product lined to those that will pay premium prices first, then go down the line. Those hated big three auto makers, have been trying their best to keep supplying SUV's/Trucks (best profit margins) to an acceptable client, but maneuvered into regulations making that not their choice... I'll check out the M/GW produced by one Nuclear power plant, built today and just how many Wind or Solar Units it requires to equal that production, but think you'll find for the cost and/or space required, there is no comparison, certainly not long term. Solar units on houses or buildings are fine and I support those that can afford the cost...

I don't know about Obama, but most of his advisor's including Emmanuel and Axlerod, realize the private sector will end the recession. Their goal IMO is to increase the size of government and the agencies involved, with an increased roll played by Unions, which is the lifeblood of their party. They also know any promoting of 'Alternative Energy' in the name of 'Global Warming' will have to come from controlling control over the US resources and attitudes stemming from cost of current sources of energy. Regulations and taxing of these sources will be coming, probably on day one. Keep the price high of current energy, to keep interest of alternatives going... Computers and/or chips, prices fell by competitive pricing. Applied Materials (AMD), Intel and others have continuously fought with consumer product producers for use of their products, over an all new consumer product. Computer Company's have dropped prices primarily to bring new demographics into buying their products, just as Auto, TV and most manufacturers of elective (non-essential) items. E-Machine, which had the first under 300.00 Set up was from Taiwan in total (bought up by Gateway, late 90's) but had an unlimited buy order in the US market, shipped all they could produce. Power Companies are regulated in most States (if not all) to profits, even having to apply to raise prices. It is also considered essential and are involved with massive distribution infrastructures. Electrical power is basically a continuous product, most never used or said another way, if no body was using at all, would still require the system to operate at nearly the same rate. Wind Farms, Solar Farms and some Geo-thermal sources (Cal/Nv) are already linked into the current grids/systems, however it will take years (estimates up to 100 years) to build and incorporate these sources if even possible (access to user from sources). The further the user from the source, the greater the loss. No one seems to address the land usages required, where and then the cost to build maintain each unit in the farm for a comparable wattage, compared to the current generations systems, including Nuclear.

Large International Corporations lead the way to efficiency and productivity. If thats not progressing forward, please explain this new version. Although, I have spent my life in Small Business, was reasonable successful in competing with Larger Competitor (Circle K, 7/11, Kroger's and the like) and continue to support small business today, there is no comparison in efficiency, progress or the benefits afforded the general public. Congress has authority over the purse strings of the Federal Government and Congress is made up of representatives from all States. The House, with 53 Representatives from California alone, many States with around 15-20 and seven with one member may pass up to a thousand spending bills annually. The Senate with equal representation from each State, MAY pass on 50 or so bills for the Presidents signature/veto. In 2007 California contributed per capita/person, from all sources for Federal Revenue the US average of 8528.00/person, while most other States contributed well over, yet least represented the total. (Federal Tax Revenue, Wikipedia, based on 305 Million people and 2.67 Trillion total revenue from all sources). Short of some perceived emergency or the bidding process they have no authority to specify particular spending and cannot direct money to exactly where a problem may exist. In fact they issue primarily 'Block Grants' to States, which can come from any Federal Department, through congressional actions. This is hardly a scenario for prudent spending to assist economic recovery, as the recent 350 Billion bailouts suggest. On Acid Rain; Your complaints are valid, but remain subjective. I might suggest Atmosphere along any major roadway, especially where trucks stops are present or many trucks travel are far more contaminated than down wind from power plants and probably for longer periods of time. The problem has been around for some time and has been addressed, successfully in Germany or France where Nuclear power has been adopted. The US headed this way and the same folks that complain about AP today from Coal or Gas Generated Energy, have fought Nuclear. Am sure you know China is building one coal powered facility, PER WEEK. Your going to come back with Wind/Solar/Geothermal, which are already available and much can be purchased today in most places, at a cost. Remember my earlier comments, that any source to sustain the 6.6 Billion has to be affordable to the majority. iNow; Your not alone in listing -0- dependents. Added to this are the number of people who file Standard Deductions, feeling they will not be audited and the results amount to billions being loaned to government, interest free each year. However, I don't feel those that prefer to pay only what is due or take authorized deductions and paying when due are 'Freeloaders'.

Rather than getting involved, just a couple thoughts... When a person joins the US Military today (any branch) they are given a battery of test. From these test your profession in that branch is often determined, little to no choice. The end results can be beneficial to the person or maybe not... Vaccines in general given or required are determined or agreed to by School Districts, usually from recommendations of some State Health Agency or from the Federal mandates given, to receive Grants. Under Socialism, choice is removed from the equation or the parents/child has no alternative. In the US today, aside from Home Schooling, Private or Religious Schools, you can pack your bags and move elsewhere. Registration for the Draft, is US Law, every male whether a citizen or not is required to register, but many States have little or no enforcement of that law. In the US today, there are thousands of communities (many towns) with laws/rule/regulation on everything from the size of home you build, what color you can paint your house, where you cannot park you personal car and closing the garage door, ages of occupants, what can be on your roof your trash can and hundreds of things to comply with. For all practical purpose this would be considered socialism, much more likely communism. Incremental imposition of these rule/laws etc., and the incremental of acceptance of them is what I fear for upcoming generations and see everyday in various movements, especially environmental issue or groups pushing the moral norms to their personal desires. These examples are local and there are many more examples where very little to no government (any) requirement are enforced. Socialism offers no choice...Even our Federal Tax system is a choice; if you earn enough money (choice), have not obligated to some expense (kid's, paying interest, other deductible expenses) you are required to pay more, your choice.

Think the Documentary was filmed at 'Brookhaven Rehabilitation Center' (specializing in the obese), Queens NY. Best I can find out, their patience list and waiting list come from folks on Medicaid. 718 Area code, if you know the area and probably in your yellow pages. Brookhaven, is a very common name for Hospitals/Clinics all over the US. Not sure, but think their is a 'For Profit' chain of clinics or hospitals also named Brookhaven. You might enjoy the documentary as well, living on the Island, but cannot find a future airing. You can also google *Brookhaven+Obese+Forums* getting many other comments on previous airings...none I posted.

When it comes to you, I am always hesitant to agree. Socialism in short, is the ownership/operation by government, opposed to public ownership and operation. What your trying to do is link regulation/mandates (laws) of the Federal and assume State Governments to what your calling 'mixed'. What government has been doing or plans on doing with these bailouts is partial ownership (preferred stocks) of Company's they are financial aiding. Since, in the name of the 'taxpayer' accepting this assistance, requires this partial ownership IMO, the government is Nationalizing in part a business. Congress and media has gone further in insisting on 'rules/regulations' additionally being attached we are simply getting closer to a 'degree' (operative word, not mixed) of socialism. 1- I have said, I do not know what the current plans are for Universal Health Care mean to the Obama Administration. Clinton's plan was socialistic and if implemented as I understood it, the Federal would have controlled who could study for what (by needs) in Medical Schools, where they practiced and on into the Pharmaceutical Industry. Total government and pure socialistic. There are voucher systems, credit systems and involvement through business, which would be additional intervention through the Capitalist economy. AND yes, I can with hold comment for lack of understanding or knowledge coming from the source. 2-3 and what should be 4- First Health Care is not the US Federal Governments responsibility. There must be a hundred other things involved in maintaining good physical/mental health that can cause it going bad, that government would have to get involved with. What your indirectly suggesting is staggering in scope and where European Health Care is heading. From childhood nurturing by parents to when old age disqualifies a person for care or who gets what as demand increases or even with patient is left to die while one is attended. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergediNow; Had to leave to check out future broadcast on a Documentary, but could not find a future date. 'Brookhaven Obesity Clinic/Hospital', has 75 800$/day beds (2006), maintains a waiting list of 100, outside NYC but caters to only special needs of the obese from around the US. I recently saw one documentary 'Half Ton Hospital' on the History Channel. Our conversation reminded me of this viewing. Another article seen today as an AP Article, 'Obese, now more then Fat in US' think 27% obese 26.7 now falling into Fat categories. No one in the documentary and must believe any person while gaining these extraordinary pounds, could possibly say they didn't know it was bad for their health. Even those that make it to Brookhaven, some staying for months, fail while there or leave and fail to maintain the program. Reason given for weight gains or lack of control, almost always go to some emotional feeling, I suppose for many reason Alcoholics/legal-illegal drug users fall off the wagon or in fact get on the that wagon. I have brought this up to possibly make you understand, the cost involved and the involvement pre-emptive health care, that would be involved on just one item, with only 75 people and in most cases a lifetime with the same problem. However if you haven't seen the documentary, it would be worth your while and interesting outside this discussion.

Yes the 'ifs' are huge, but they include a whole lot more the 'Universal Health care. Whats worse, any error made in many of the problems could lead to a catastrophic conclusion... I really have no idea, what the 'Obama' plan for health care is. If fact I have gone back over the 3,296 news conferences since winning the election and I am not sure of any of his policy. On the US System or Free Market over Government Control and assuming its partially or totally based on Ms. Clinton's 1993 proposals and in short; It would totally destroy the built in incentive aspirations of the American Medical System, to say nothing of the quality of at least a portion of todays system. I do agree preventative health care, should be studied and when something tangible evolves, be announced. What I see today and have noticed for my years on the planet, are personal viewpoints based on some agenda or desire to punish some self perceived human action. From salt, caffeine, sugar substitutes, synthetic foods, apples or a thousand items claimed harmful, then retracted, I have become skeptical of mans ability to judge just what is harmful or that any one item good for some may in fact be harmful to others. To me, sky diving, taming lions, boxing/wrestling, even driving is more harmful than most other human activity. My Mother, drank alcohol, smoked (worse yet inhaled my Dads second hand smoke) during her two pregnancies, as did her mother with her seven kids and millions of others over generations of people, with out any apparent problem. Then we were raised when food was sprayed with DDT, paint was lead based and most building materials contained asbestos. I walk the RR Track to school, in the rain and probably if had some time, come up with hundreds of things, no longer acceptable. I did follow you other post and did give an opinion. As said and think you point, socialism can and does exist with capitalism. The problem is and beginning to appear in the US, that socialism can become addictive. It would be nice if we could all live like Al Gore, but then Warren Buffet would not be happy, currently living in the same house he bought in 1953 and is happy. It would be nice to own a 72 inch TV or drive only Cadillacs, or travel the world, but then those things never interested me to begin with. Necessities today and those of 1940 are not the same and with Capitalism those things that are seen important can be had by many more. I don't think Castro, wanted the Cuba he created (much evidence to this), but as the Capitalist and the investment community left, he had little choice if he was to rule.

In part and by design; US Federal Government addresses the needs based on the common interest of all 50 (today) States. State Government addresses the needs of based on the common interest of all the Counties/Parishes with in their State. County, City/Town or community governments address the needs and interest of their people. When thinking of some issue, keep in mind which has authority over that particular issue or in particular which do not. Nealy every aspect of your day to day life, involves local or State Law and almost with out question never involves Federal. The most common error, is the assumption everything is credited or complained about, comes from the Federal. Education the most common I address, is as local an issue as any you will find. No person of any authority or desiring to achieve authority, favors contaminated Air, Water, Streams, Oceans or anything having to do with the environment. Industry/Corporations/Business of any kind is made up of individuals, no less that your local PTA or Bar Room gathering. Their are always a few bad apples and always a majority you can accept. Each entity plays the game of acceptance by as many as possible, no less than you accept a neighbor, a boss or members of you bowling team. If to begin with, your looking for a problem, your going to find a problem. No business or person can be perfect to any other, much less the numbers of others involved in any social order. Since mankind first began to reason, they have sought out means to help the helpless. Modern man/society, long before democratic governments formed or socialistic systems, FDR, even Lyndon Johnson or Obama, had/has been benevolent. Institution have formed and contribution have supported these organizations and had been doing no less through Church's/Civic groups long before them. Now the one point you made that worries me; You "have the right to breath clean air and not subject to acid rain"....I assume your right includes defining just what 'clean air' and 'acid rain' means and the assumption mankind can prevent it or alter your environment in the first place. Hawaii, has been in the process of forming, since written history as been around. Volcano's erupt and are going to until the earths core cools (we will be gone by then). Acid rain has been around a very long time. We have 6.6 or so billion people living on this planet, each with equal rights to others for existence IMO. To sustain this level and I suspect in a short time (2200-2500AD) another 10-50 Billion, current technology that is practical, cheap and efficient and affordable to the majority has to be used. If this objective infringes on your rights then I am sorry, but I'll go with the billions who depend on those systems to work. I'll add, we exist only because our atmosphere progress over billions of years to some where around 21% Oxygen, with a atmospheric pressure around 30 and has been maintained by natural forces long enough for us to evolve. As we exist today could not be, if it fell below 15-16% or goes over 25% or so. Then where does our oxygen come from and whats the food source for that production???

Paragraph 1; Very true, but largely understated. Not only are us elderly people living longer, there are increasingly more of us, percentage wise. I would argue under the 1936 Original Program it could have worked, at least much longer, but added programs and access to SS funds for other than intended purpose has destroyed that original intent. Example; I retired January of 2003, having paid about 50k into my fund, most earlier years the maximum amount. (includes some employer contributions and many years of self employed), but have already received back that 50k and a good chunk of interest, figure will pass my contributions plus interest this year. To the thread; Guess the IOU's which have never drawn a dime of interest (savings bonds?) are enough to care on the SS program for years to come, but Medicaid, would seem to be the real problem and IMO created by government itself. W/O government programs, does anybody really think any hospital or medical facility could charge the going rates. Called market forces and has been interrupted by both government mandates and requirement, to say nothing of the legal system dead set on redistribution of wealth to itself. Pangloss; If the economy had not tanked, which IMO is still arguable, the predicted deficit would be far less. Its a combination of expenses to fix a perceived problem and the reduction of projected Federal Revenues. This year 2009, is probably correct, but from what has already happened. If Paulson and/or Bush programs were incorrectly or unnecessarily activated, which even the Obama Team seems to agree were not correct, following up with additional and similar programs would seem to be a false premise to correct future problems. They (the Obama team) can become the Worlds Greatest Conservative Movement, by words and actions during the next six months. As iNow suggest, its in the "ifs" and all indications are the Obama Team will use the opportunity given to create the Worlds newest form of socialism.

Should have said most 'filers' don't' pay any or 'significant amounts'. In 2006 of the 100% of filers paid IRS as Income tax...50% of people, paid 2.99% of the total and the other 50% paid 97.01%. It is based on a 'Adjusted Gross/Taxable Incomes' of 31,987, or wages minus deductions (itemized or not). Below 31,987 AGI paid the 2.99%. Every wage earner, whether 2 or more in the same family pays somewhere around 16% in SS/Medicaid Taxes, up to around 97,000, regardless of deductions or whether Income taxes are due. I do understand an employer pays 1/2, but consider that part of the employees cost. Ironically the self employed person pays SS/M only on the profits reported, ATI to the employee, not the income received, though does pay the entire amount, him/her self. Side note; On you personal check deductions. You have the option to claim dependents, which dictates your paycheck deductions for all taxes. Most folks use this as a saving account, claim -0- dependents, not very smart, and receive up to 100% back each year. Others choose to use the 'Standard Deduction' when in fact many would be far better off 'itemizing deductions. Another factor would be retired folks, who live off investments, dividends or property gains. These people, including myself, pay taxes not necessarily Income, but statistically added to those paying 'Income Taxes'. Millions of others on disability or some form of welfare, are limited to earning, don't file and assumed not required. Most PEOPLE, don't pay 'Federal Income Taxes'...

Think your (and others) are confusing State and the Federal Government. Since 1980 the US Federal Government has issued 'Block Grants' (by policy) to States based on population for most whatever they are involved with. Most infrastructure expenditures by States is a combination of State/Federal Funds, neither necessarily collected for a specific purpose. You mentioned roads; Gas/Diesel Taxes, collected specifically for 'Roads/Bridges/Repairs or maintenance' in most States is far above the Federal 18.5G/24D per gallon, but percentage wise pay far less than 10% of the actual cost. Toll Road Receipts, do not go to the Federal Government, are the responsibility of States to maintain and are 100% paid for by private of State Funds. Additionally, the only Federal Assistance for Highway Construction/Maintenance are for the National Highways, not State/County highways or city streets (unless part of some National Highway). This includes any bridges, tunnels or whatever infrastructure exist on any roadway. Then the States are obligated to offer for bidding (contracts) anything being built in their individual States, not the Federal, even work on the Interstate System. There are certain requirements, the Interstate System having similar limitations in all States and much less restrictive on other National Roads. The point of this is, unless the Federal, under some stimulus program has a means to offer 'Categorical Grants' and then enforce any requirements, even to simply being used for the purpose requested (they do not have the means) the entire idea is impractical. I don't think the Sewer System of any City/Town is Federal Responsibility. Most people don't pay Federal Income Tax, to begin with, you know all the current arguments. As for legal, think you know Congress has the authority to Tax and can tax whatever they want. If anything is Illegal it would be Social Security and most everyone does pay this. If wanting to argue legality, would question 'forced savings account' which is the premise of the system. On Corporate Tax Accounts, I do agree good Tax Attorney's can keep these taxes down, legally and where small companies can't afford quality accountants, can become costly. Every year thousand of truck or rail car product is en-route to someplace from 12-30 to 1-2, to avoid some tax, sometimes even going through Canada, the same for payments due and a host of things to get out of inventory tax or posting profits. It part of the game, but remember most the Corporations you have in mind (publicly owned) pay absolutely NO taxes in the first place. They collect from the consumer... On losing rights to the Capitalistic System, I am a bit confused. You have every right to become part of that system, can buy stocks in some company (or not) buy the products/services of some company (or not) and yet receive all the benefits of a competitive system. The Wal Mart Story is true and if you do shop at Wal Mart or some other big retailer your going to save a great deal of money over buying the same products from a host of small retailers. I venture to say in 30 years or so, prices paid by the consumer today will still be around or if nothing else, the availability of products to consumers will be enhanced. That is if government, doesn't get involved through taxation of popular products seen by a few as anti-environmental, harmful to people or some species, too extravagant, not extravagant enough or the shape/size/color is offensive to some one else. If your over 30, you have lost rights, but from government, not the Corporate Structure...IMO.

The short answer and obviously an opinion, opposed to the majority now in charge and those that will soon be in charge of "action".... Creations of FALSE BOTTOMS; Anytime in history when one or another aspect of an economy pops/burst/declines or reaches its peek in a period of time, it has declined in value until interest or the investment society again becomes interested. Whether the many during the 'Great Depression' or the hundreds of times one sector is involved, that sector will suffer until it reaches a REAL bottom. Government by intervention (over that of the private sector) creates a false bottom. In todays market the investor/consumer is NOT confident that bottom is real. Banks for instance IMO, are not now or have they been with out resources to loan funds to whom ever they please, but lack the confidence to loan based on government spending, the historic results of that spending and the (as indicated) the PRODUCTIVITY when government becomes involved. Our 15 Trillion dollar GDP, with Japan second at under 5 Trillion and the total World GDP of around 55 Trillion, has occurred with massive improvements in what each spent dollar to an eventual outcome has been based on unparalleled productivity. From mass production (Henry Ford) to Computerization this has occured... The longer answer would involve circumstances leading up to a perceived problem, requiring hours to explain. Even today IMO, either the Bush or Obama administration, could make a few announcements. Most controversial and again IMO, the cause and effect of this so called crisis... 1- Make all Bush Tax Cuts 2003 permanent. Ceremonial for sure, since most every administration has changed some aspects of the Tax Code. Obama could make a few adjustments, reduce the Corporate Tax down to 25% or so, at least in line with most the industrialized world. This alone and by noon the next day the markets (all) would be up 20%. 2- Shut down all regulations of American Resources on public land and/or off shore. This would involve 'Executive orders' taking authority away from Courts or in many cases States. The price of oil would drop to 15-20/B and remain there, whether on not much activity actually followed. There are just so many people/industry involved and are working around the world already, even today. Side note on this; Road and Infrastructure Building Company's are already also going 100%. New ones can't form for the same reason the existing one can't increase in size. Availability of labor in most places or the cost of labor in other unionized areas. Where I live in SE NM, we just completed the largest Road Project in NM in years. Since its over, guess its OK to say most all workers were not from the US, legal or not I don't know for sure. 3- Pass an 'Immigration Reform Act', should have passed two years ago. Even in this period of increasing unemployment, there are some jobs people living in this country (from where ever) just won't do and other jobs they want to many perks or wages to make the company competitive in a World Economy. I am familiar with long haul 'Trucking Company's' and would hate to list the failures in this business over the past 50 years. Rail cars have replaced over half the long haul drivers. Side note; Did you know nearly half the Medical Doctors are foreign born or first generation? Seems many will no longer go through 16-20 years of education and 4-7 years of internship. 4- Deregulate the auto industry, at least allowing another 10 years or so, for the 'Big Three' to retool into what ever alternative energy emerges on top. The Janesville Wisconsin GM Chevrolet Plant, closed 2 week ago, no longer feasible to retool into anything. It was the oldest US Plant (built 1919) but many others nearly as old still exist. As for emission and/or m/g rules, at least hold to todays and forget the 2011 requirements or any of the State requirements now being proposed or placed into law. I am not sure any auto maker can profitably produce an auto/truck or that the public will in fact pay for that product. There are more, but have offered a scenario where todays problems have stemmed from or where continuous problems will persist. I haven't bothered to go into the Health Care Service, Educational Programs or pending problems in SS, which government will most certainly effect in short order. IMO again, could all be avoided and won't be... ecoli; After 9/11 and in the current atmosphere, government is saying to 'go about business as usual', I don't think they have dropped the savings issue as a foreseeable problem. This probably has as much to do with 'baby boomer's' as anything, who in general are going to be dependents on society, if they don't save at a much quicker rate, statistically anyway.

No matter what you buy, spend on, that money you give up goes on. You bought the TV or an ounce of gold, who you gave the money to will replace the TV in a store, or the person you bought the gold from may buy that replacement. If you have a savings account, invest in some stock or anything seen as 'savings' that money is far from 'out of the economy'. The Bank or the company you invest in will, turn around and invest or use your money. Pay wages or whatever on the promise you will receive -X%- interest or the company will grow your investment. The answer to your question is 'either' will have the same effect. This is why the US Government promotes savings in the first place. Oh yes, that TV remains in the economy in many other ways; Even if under warranty any repairs will be paid by some one, your cable hook up, all those billions spent trying to get products into your home by advertising or sponsoring programs and when you trash it or trade it in, a new owner takes over or the local land fill get involved.

npts2020; I think you have a sub-point, possibly a waste of resources that could be used for social needs opposed to protection, but that billion dollars worth of bombs, involved a whole list of non military business to create each bomb. Steel Mills, fabrication, mineral mining, administrative and all the transportation involved. It does end with the dropping of those bombs and if protection is not important so does the economic value. Housing is probably the best example of a useful item, Where all that goes into building one home is bought by one family, spending probably up to half their income (for years, then a portion) on all it takes to own the home bought. This probably best explains the current problem, when (as Bruce mentioned) CONFIDENCE, is removed from any equation. New items, such as TV's (related items), computers (related items) and the prospect of alternative energy sources or what 'Nanotechnology' will evolve can be very productive to any economy. Transfer of money is basically an economy, the longer any dollar can circulate through an economy, before being absorbed into non productive items (usually taxes) the better that dollar will contribute to the economy...

If you consider most projects involved with job creations were created from increasing debt or taxing from an available work force/investor class, you would get a zero net gain in GDP. No gains to the investor and the workforce paid from money drawn from the economy. You might check out 'Wikipedia' and 'The Great Depression' or research 'Milton Friedman' on the Great Depression'. He and others contribute the major cause to the fall of the markets and the resulting loss in confidence of both the consumer and investor. Then has today the consumer made/make up the largest portion of GNP/GDP, which economists tend to follow for Economical Health. Then the seem to blame the 'Gold Standard Base' for monetary valuation, followed by tightening of the money supply. Making money unavailable to both the investor or consumer, which in those days was already restricted in many ways, compared to today. Might add as early as 2002, Ben Bernackie, had agreed with Friedman on 'access to funds'. In any event most that follow Friedman's principles, do not feel the work programs did anything to end the 'Great Depression' but in fact going into a War economy did... In part I disagree with their findings, and feel the investor class (their were still a good many) had gone overseas with their investment. Many countries in the early 30's had not come back from WW I and had little debt, which should have been seen as sound conditions for growth. It was and many of those investors did very well. I also tend to probably over credit the 'Dust Bowl Days' in most the Central US, for many of the problems in those days. I don't buy the 'Gold Standard' problem and feel the current loose money policy is building a false bottom to the problems. Banks, financial institutions and the investors are concerned with real problems and real bottoms. They are not going to loan anything, build anything or invest in anything or for that matter buy anything (confidence) until there are seen bottoms and this is not being seen and obstructed with Federal intervention. My opinion... Example; The 'Empire State Building' ground was broken well after the 29 market crash and completed in 1932. (For comparison to the 'Twin Towers' rebuilding this was built in about 400 days). Not until 1950 did those investors turn a profit. This well after the war and when the general consumer had taken charge of the economy, today near 70% of the GDP and small investors had re-entered the economy in the US.

Why couldn't the UN authorize Egypt to assume responsibility over the Gaza Strip, with assistance. Autonomy for Palestinians could still exist via Lebanon, any die hards moving there. Wouldn't this moot the purpose of Hamas, in the first place or the Iranian intervention.

I suspect all 50 Democratic Senators that advised Blogo to resign or allow a State Election, will embrace (in private) Roland Burris, no different for the next bunch on Jan. 6th, 2009. Saying things like it wasn't you, "you know it isn't you" and so on... Burris is 71 yo and will/would be up for re-election in 2010 at 73. Though he most certainly could run, probably winning re-election, knowing he will never achieve seniority (very important) to accomplish much, he would likely concede to one of his competitors (there will be several) and hope that person followed him. Burris has always taken on 'Chicago Politics' but don't think he is up to a real campaign. He lost to Blago himself and Mayor Daily in recent elections. I don't support the notion of Chicago US Representative Bob Rush, Burris or anyone feeling the US Senate should maintain one Black Senator, but it is a valid point after electing the first Black President. IMO... Now the Patrick Fitzgerald has asked for a continuance, to prosecute Blago, think 90 days, my imagination is running wild. First, his even being there is in question as he would be serving at the pleasure of Obama and Presidents tend to fire (most resign first) any to all Federal Prosecutors. I have had serious problems with motivations of Federal Prosecutors in the past, including Spitzer or Giuliano and have always questioned the J. Edgar Hoover operation of the FBI. If Obama was to fire Fitzgerald, for any reason, Obama sets up the perfect scenario for the RNC, or if he doesn't takes on the possibility several members of his Administration will be drawn into the issue, possible indirectly Obama himself...

iNow; Aside from the Constitution itself, I am not aware of any precedent to site, with regards to State Right's to elect and/or nominate their own Senators, Illinois uses the nomination system. The Senate, uses my examples (listed or implied in the Constitution) in rejecting Federal Appointment Nominations, but has no authority IMO, over States rights to who/how/why a replacement is picked, other than the same reasons used to deny any other nomination. I would like to see the 'Law' Mr. Reid used to assert his right over Blago's authority. It does not exist or at best a broadening of Congressional Power. I don't think the US SC would allow this. He (Reid) could then say Ms. Kennedy would not be seated because the now Governor of NY, has admitted to being involved in an illicit affair, personally admitting to this or any future nomination for any number of made up reasons...WON'T HAPPEN, and we will just have to watch it play out.

My opinion; Senator Reid, well before the Nomination of Burris, established 'cause', for not accepting ANY nomination by Blago, which was/is not legal. Congress has the authority to reject any elected official based on the election, based on legitimacy, age, citizenship or mental/physical disability, not for reasons they obtained the victory/nomination. Burris, a former State Attorney General, apparently of good character, qualified under any scenario cannot be refused seating, even with a 2/3rds vote in the Senate. He would have and assume planned out the right of appeal to the Supreme Court, which would IMO, over rule any Senate denial of seating.... Sticking with opinion, the real issue to me is the influence over the politics by the US Justice System in the first place. Personally I feel Blago is a stain on the US or Illinois political system and will no doubt do hard time for some of his actions (not necessarily) for 'pay for play' in the political systems of either State or Federal. The entire system is built on doing favors for some kind of recognition and to assume winning candidates don't take this into consideration, when making appointments or what ever are their duties is failing to understanding human nature or the purpose for support given in the first place...Hustling a Medical system, for any purpose is quite a different story.

I should know better by now and I do agree with much of your arguments on this issue, even others but; If you go back over iNow's post on this or other threads relating to 'Same Sex Marriage' he most certainly has offered an interpretation of law, which the Courts in California, Massachusetts, Connecticut and to some degree others have agreed with. The link of 'Race Bias' and 'Sexual Orientation', has been made by these State Courts and under the law, then become the Law of the State. You probably know this already and also know State Courts or in fact State Legislatures are not bound to popular opinion. That is as close to proving or disproving anything on this issue... As for what I call 'cop out' (strawman) arguments, often used to when some one is tired of arguing the same things over and over, I also find them annoying. Frankly I don't post on many forums, where even the Administrators will request 'Sources', the 'Peer Review' or some nonsense to validate an opinion that formed over 30-40-50 years on any topic I might otherwise join in on. Many older folks, as I am, have lived through changes in Science and/or Social Issues, which have gone both ways and in some cases back again in my lifetime. 'Sodomy to Same Sex', is just one example...and reasonably NEW to the US Social Structure, for whatever reason. As for Obama and Mr. Warren, it will be interesting to see the response and/or follow up by both, after the inauguration. I personally believe Obama, at least has studied Islam (Koran), adamantly opposes 'Same Sex Marriage', which is very much acceptable to his and the Democratic Party very 'BASE'.

Pangloss; Not noted for my dancing abilities, I don't think my attitudes toward the Gay community are appalling, even remotely. 1- It is my opinion, this movement and it has been a movement for no less than 50 years (I have been involved with) is directed at 'Religious Concepts' of what Society should accept (Agnostic myself). 2- It is my opinion, that all such final resolutions to social issue should come from States or the people in those States (not the Federal). That at some point (has always happened), when it gets down to where a few States, continue to hold out against the majority, THEN the Federal via Congress or SC actions should get involved to support the majority of States, not EVER to support a minority of States or of individuals (Courts) in any number of States. This is not the current situation. 3- It is my opinion, sexual orientation, is most certainly a moral issue, religiously opposed to and in the US up to 80% of the people believe in some entity as their God and belief their leaders to what constitutes moral issues. I would also suggest the vast majority of CURRENT Gay couples, oppose the actions of fringe groups trying to legitimize homosexuality, their own preference, rather wishing they had made other choices, knowing of reasons they in fact chose that lifestyle (Almost always first sexual experience). 4- It is my opinion there is most certainly a slippery slope argument, not only to moral issues but any issue pertaining to rights. Arguments on the slippery slope have not changed in my years and will not change in the future. Rights inherently are removed by such activity, generally quietly as the movements progress, as equalization of the individual are granted. Imagine what the Country would look like if the Amish Society was an active movement, if the Mormons original doctrine had trumpeted, the KKK had prevailed or a thousand other movements had seceded in our history or if Islam or the hundred other segmented societies NOW in the US succeed in the future. 5- You will not find one quote where I oppose the rights of Gays, to the limits of current laws or that I oppose changes in law to permit benefits. I do oppose the methods being used and activist judges or politicians trying to make others feel they are somehow compassionate to the issue, when in most cases they are anything but. 6- To repeat the gut of my post #125; No LAW, regarding people or there actions can be justly equal to application in this country. This in fact is what generates the 'slippery slope scenario', in the first place, trying to include as many as possible under one law. Suffrage and its history, a very good example. One movement very much alive is a 16YO voting age, which came from the 18 YO (from 21yo). Law granted by States differ today from State to State on what the Marriage Contract means to their State, especially along the lines of inheritance and with out a 'Last Will' they can be as destructive as any problem a 'Gay Union' would encounter today. For the record, and I entered the current case in Louisiana for this purpose... I do feel, Gays and especially Lesbian association issue's should be addressed and society should be tolerant to their emotional problems which come from being seen as 'outcast' with in the society. There are far to many inconsistency in State Laws or even Supreme Court Decisions or what the heads of Federal Government say/comment on. I don't know the solution or pretend to know, but one thing is for sure; These inconsistencies, as I see them are headed for a brick wall and should become resolved before that wall is hit...

I rarely comment on post/threads, I TOTALLY agree with.... In trying to come up with an approach to this issue, having read much of the history behind Israel and their problems to survive and seemingly constant repeats of these problems the thread title said it all..."Round.....". Well done and the comments your getting, may be those of the World Community, for a change. Maybe Government's (Politics) will see the light, note the level of terrorism around the World and connect it to what has been common place for Israel for years and years and years....

When you visit the local Courthouse and obtain a license, to marry, drive a car, build something or keep some pet, your taking ON responsibility certainly over any beneficial factors. Marriage happens to be one license, no longer required by any government entity and a good many have or choose not to obtain, UNLESS they have some religious or traditional reasoning behind the move. Cohabitation of individuals, two or more and with any make up are as common as day and night. People live together for a variety of reason, not always sexual in nature. All those people, regardless of reasoning or the motives involved are individually protected under the same laws. Think about 20 States have inserted some 'common law' to add certain protection to co-habitations over a prescribed time and give those added obligations to both parties, under the current State Sanctioned marriage laws. Don't confuse some of these laws which involve a third party (children) and are directed at any person, as their responsibility. The one major added RESPONSIBILITY, I have seen listed is the guardian responsibility under the Marriage License. Both parties, then become the first person responsible for the others, for decisions if the other is somehow incapacitated. Pre-nuptial agreements or contracts can nullify that obligation and most others or in fact can make non certified unions equal to those and other responsibilities. In my opinion, then no person is treated any different in any union, regardless of conditions, unless they are ignorant or unaware of their rights. The same is true for those in certified marriage and not understanding the responsibilities. Aside from all this; We are a nation of laws...No law treats every person the same, NONE. A person in one State can do many things, that in another State are punishable in another and if you take this to sentencing the differences can be extensive. Our Federal System can set guidelines for all States and set standards for benefits however they please. SS for instance, awards the estate of a deceased a death benefit and the State determines who is in charge of that estate. If an employed person is in a recognized union, for 9 years 11 months and twenty nine days, the surviving partner is entitled to nothing under law and if 10 years (40 quarters) they are eligible for survivors befits. The two friends (sex not the issue) or siblings that cohabitate in a deceased parents home or all those unions never recorded are no more qualified for those benefits than 'same sex' partners and in this case, my point to how laws work.... The 'Associated Press' broke a story yesterday, apparently in 'News Week', by Janet McConnaughey of two men (not married) but from San Diego, California. These two fellows were granted custody of a new born in 2006, in Louisiana and granted a Birth Certificate for the child in one partners name. They filed suit against the State of Louisiana for joint listing on the Certificate and granted their wishes (two men or dad's). It is expected to be appealed. The request was made to simplify the bread winners claim to keep the infant on his employment Health Care records, as he was the one not listed. Also they had been questioned trying to board a plane, with the baby and could not prove the 'Black' child was indeed in their custody, both being white, or that they had not kidnapped the child.

First ALL people, have equal protection under the law, today. Married or not, gay, straight or even those accused of criminal activity. As for 'my point', it seems to me you all are going back and forth arguing historic Gay attitudes, when in fact there was no possible mention of the lifestyle, under that meaning. Think my point quite clear... As for my added point that Gays can already marry, under sanction from some church, should be the total reality of the issue. It apparently is not, is an attempt to gain 'ACCEPTANCE' or some benefit, which indeed your certificate is a government contract for those specific privileges, few that they are. As for my 'last paragraph'; This was a pre-emptive move to off set the usual argument the US is some how formed as an atheist State and/or should not be concerned with theological reasoning. The people it was intended to know well how it relates, and will add it involves the topic issue...Obama/Warren relationship. IMO...

iNow; It's said 99+% of all species have become extinct, since complex life first appeared. It seems reasonable many have ceased existence on lifestyle for whatever purpose. Much of sub-complex life, where no sex is involved remain today pretty much as they existed for billions of years. We are complex... I really don't like your analogy however, feeling many practices of other primates or animals in general would be destructive to the human race. Animals are extremely territorial for instance, which man has displayed over time including today, but unacceptable to the modern human.