guys

we may have a horrible problem ahead.

lack of energy - lack of calories, btus - to fuel our electic needs.

Iran seem to appear to address this problem.

we are trying to get new mexico to address this problem.

http://www.prosefights.org/pnmelectric/pnmelectric.htm

Cheers
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=nojeh+nsa

I read the Guardian May 7, 2007 (still a bit old)  Derakhshan article.  I would not call myself an RSFer for any reason but I am against repression of free speech even if it would be in opposition to my own beliefs so in that sense you could call me a radical cyber-dissident.  It is obvious that Hossein Derakhshan and you are impassioned about the state of Iran.  I am against any aggression against Iran and have stated so in many places on the Truthdig site.  I do not know if RSF censor censorship as I haven’t seen it.  Instead of second hand reports I would believe it if I saw it in their own print.  Do you have that kind of evidence? Would you say that the report dated August 27, 2008, “Journalist from the Arab minority sentenced to five years in prison” is a lie?

Is this “new” enough for you, or are you a “RSF cyber-dissident”, I’m starting to wonder about you.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/may/07 /cutthebias

Derakhshan was a poster boy for Reporters Without Borders, until he realized exactly what they were doing with his information - using it to prime the media with anti-Irani information. When he outed them, it was all over and the shutting down of his blog in 2007, DID NOT make their “State of Press Freedom Worldwide in 2007” list.

In checking out Hossein Derakhshan, I can find no reason to believe he provides any truth to his criticisms.  Merely stating someone is not biased does not make it true.  What exactly is the proof of his unbiased opinions?  The article Virginia777 provides of his complaint about Reporters Sans Frontiers which is what Derakhshan calls it (aka Reporters Without Borders) is still a year and three quarters old.  How can campaigns against censorship and human rights violations be counterproductive to Iranis are not explained, just dogmatically insisted?  Please provide real news.  Most of the Truthdiggers I’ve encountered would be glad to hear “real” news and have consistently expressed disbelief in MSM news objectivity.

to: Shenonymous

Hossein Derakhshan is NOT a biased Irani. He is nothing less than Iran’s Online Free-speech Pioneer, also called the Blogfather of Iran and credited with kickstarting Iran’s blogging revolution. He is a brave, essential voice and has faced great hostility for his views.

He has criticized NGOs such as Reporters Without Borders and Human Rights Watch, saying their campaigns against censorship and human rights violations in Iran are often counter-productive and serve American interests more than those of Iranians.

And if important information/News has never been resolved, never been reported on by a MSM (how surprizing) - well, it is still completely valid and relevant.

Thats why this site is called TRUTHdig.

It is always so interesting to read commenters who are somewhat anachronistic using articles years old and if checked out find within those articles commenters who take the writer to rational task.  2006 Reporters without Borders report by Virginia777 is old news written by a biased Irani.

I tend to think that current vitriolic propaganda (my perception) is overstated by those in Washington as an attempt to prepare Americans for a war with Iran not unlike what they did to justify their attacking Iraq.  But that is just an opinion based on no facts!  Just a conclusion come to on hearsay evidence.  How many of you will admit to that?

Virginia777 adamantly insists that to stop an inevitable war with Iran is “via the Media” without any insistence on exactly how to do that.  The media I suppose is MSM and I say they are immovable.  Therefore, one must go outside MSM and go to free presses and other means of communication such as hand bills, posters, email and snail mailings: Direct confrontations, huge demonstrations, marches on Washington.  You know, things that have a rat’s ass chance of being effective.  If you think there are none, then you might as well walk with a paper bag over your head and duck tape on your mouth.

List all verifiable evidence please.

Here’s another media propaganda attack against Iran - from Reporters Without Borders - here they are caught issuing false information on Iran:

http://hoder.com/weblog/archives/015688.shtml
How Reporters Without Borders (RSF) is biased against Iran

The MOTION was mailed Thursday August 28, 2008 about 16:15

http://www.prosefights.org/nmlegal/hearing/hearing. htm#armijovoid2

The Brzezinski criminal complaint affidavit is before a federal court again ... after being struck once before.

The only way to stop this almost inevitable war, is via the Media.

The Media HAVE to function, like they have in the past, as the voice of Reason in this senseless situation.

Media attempts at promoting this war (which there are Plenty of) need to be attacked.

I find one of the biggest dangers in this issue, is coming from once “Liberals”. For instance, I heard a prayer in a “progressive” church, for an “end to nuclear weapon build up”.

(hmmm, where do you think THAT information came from?)

We’re trying to get out of these messes.

http://www.prosefights.org/nmlegal/hearing/hearing. htm#armijovoid2

Sodium – since I always keep a copy of what I post, I checked and all the links I referenced are still appearing at my two-part commentary.  Thank you for asking.  I am familiar with Stiglitz and I will get that book you recommended and I much appreciate your information.  Yes, I directed my final reply to Marshall yesterday.  He and I have had similar interaction before so I am quite familiar with his modus operandi.  I sometimes enjoy seeing his folly.  It is awfully entertaining at times.  And it was good exercise for me to post information and sentiments that otherwise might not have.  Again, I thank you for your assessment of this chronic situation.  The chart I referenced from the House of Representatives that will not link from TD is worthwhile to pursue as far as a quick overview of the Bush administration retrogression.  I am sorry but the site has to be hand accessed because for some odd reason the link changes from what I post to what the internet delivers.

By Marshall, August 11 at 10:27 pm

(the poor in the U.S. pay NO taxes whatsoever, so their share can’t go much lower).
Wrong again Marshall, unless you’d like to give a figure what is ‘the poor’.

Let me tell you a little story to which I can give personal voice. I stopped working in 1997, due to a serious injury on my job. I returned to work in 2000, same company, different position, since I could no longer do the job that I had done for years, due to the permanent disability that resulted from the injury, and a few botched-up surgeries. I might mention that I returned to the new position at 52% less than my former pay. I worked until mid 2001, and was subsequently forced out. 2001 was the last tax return I was required to file. From mid 2001, to Jan 2004, I had ZERO income. In 2004, I was finally awarded Social Security Disability benefits from the hundreds of thousands I’d paid into the system over the 30 plus years of my employment. As far as I’m concerned, the amount that I receive from SSDI puts me in the poverty range. It may not have me in the poverty range if I lived somewhere other than California, but this is where I do live, and so my income makes me a ‘poor person’.

Fast forward to 2006. The IRS (Privatized collection agency that they are) starts tagging my already miserly SSDI for (besides medicare parts A and B) TAXES. Yep…taxes they tell me, (when I checked to find out what the hell was going on) from 1994, when they claim my withholdings were too little. Yeah, allegedly back taxes from 12 years prior, despite the fact that I’d filed 8 tax returns after that, where I got small refunds.

And guess what, they’re STILL taking that money out of my measly benefits, and probably will be for years to come.

Guess what else? I personally know at least 3 dozen other people, to whom this same mysterious phenomena is occurring, and we’re ALL ‘poor’. So, take your little charts, and put them in the same place where all of the rest of your useless statistics belong. They have no resemblance to real life in the Dick Bush Era.

By Paracelsus, August 11 at 8:14 pm #

“There are numerous refutations of the Laffer Hypothesis.”

I wasn’t proposing the Laffer curve - simply trying to parse the meaning of your statement about revenue vs. shortfall.

“Part of formulating a better argument for yourself is actively trying to understand your opponent’s argument. I have a feeling I would spend all of tonight and the next day trying to explain it to you”

No need, as I haven’t established that you’d be a legitimate source for such an explanation.  Your condescension is duly noted though.

“I will give you a hint. In economics there are concept called “elasticity” and “diminishing marginal returns””

I need to disclose that I’m not a professional economist.  Perhaps you are.  What I can say with certainty is that economics is one of the most contentious subjects for debate, especially regarding tax policy.

By Shenonymous, August 11 at 7:32 pm #

“This is an ideal that never materializes.”

And yet it did materialize; for example in the 1980’s when federal revenue increased by $1 trillion in the decade following the 1981-83 tax cuts.

Federal tax revenues also increased every year between 2003 and 2007 (tax cuts were passed in 2001 and 2003).  Here are the CBO figures for federal tax revenue from 2003-2006 as a percentage of GDP (ratio of revenues to GDP rose a total of 1.9% during this period):

http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/CBO_table.jpg

Notice that .3% of the rise in receipts (as a percentage of GDP) was from individual Cap gains.  Also notice that 1% of the total increase was from corporate tax - the result of an improved business climate during lower overall corporate tax rates. And during this period, unemployment fell to an enviable 4.7%.

“It is fetching to think this could work, that the money not paid in taxes by the rich would be invested in business, but facts speak for themselves”

Indeed they do.  First, I didn’t say that taxes saved by the rich go into business; I said that taxes saved overall (yes, everyone received tax rebates) were an economic stimulus that increased federal business tax receipts.  Second, the proportion of federal taxes paid by “the rich” (a moving target demographic) has increased over time, not decreased (the poor in the U.S. pay NO taxes whatsoever, so their share can’t go much lower).

“Jobs and production have not increased.”

Over what period?  Jobs increased every year from 2003-2007 (http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2008/04/us-unemployment-i s-short-and-rare.html)
(I post this link for the chart data it contains, which was derived from CBO figures)

Increases in factory production have only recently begun to slow after overall increases during previous years.

“In the last eight years of failed U.S. economy that started with a Clinton treasury surplus, $237 billion which George Bush squandered and has run this country into a debt of 9.2 trillion dollars”

A debt which is, in fact, smaller as a percentage of GDP than at any time during the Clinton administration - despite the then Republican Congress’ trimming of Clinton budgets.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Debt_to_Nominal_ GDP_Chart.png

btw - I’ve never argued that we’re not currently in tough economic times.  My point has consistently been that Bush economic policies are not to blame.  You have yet to show how Bush policies led to the sub-prime mess which sparked the latest down turn.

“You bring up taxation of wage labor, but I’m not clear on whether you’re suggesting that personal income tax should be abolished in favor of import duties entirely (and sales tax, I’d assume)?”

I don’t see a Sales(VAT?) tax as something that the federal government should be given- too much potential for abuse. Import duties would strengthen domestic industry. We have too much of an armaments industry as well as a huge standing army. Working people should not have the sweat of their brows taxed. It is a type of slavery. Productive people have eternally been enslaved in one form or another to fuel the dreams of power mad lunatics. A currency that was resistant to expansion would do much to discourage empire building. 

“And I agree with you about socialized medicine (though we already have a partly socialized system).”

Part of the problem is that monopoly medicine derives profit from palliative and ineffective treatments. It is more properly sick care. I think one or two visits to a physician who is motivated to cure rather than to treat a “chronic condition” is the best outcome. Unfortunately our system profits the pharma-petrochemical industry the most. It is as if the FDA is in the business of killing off effective and reasonably priced care, while protecting dangerous products. But I have not a fully structured idea of where to proceed.

  “I believe that such a concept is unworkable in the U.S..  My solution to an extremely complicated issue would be to retain the private part of our system but change the incentives to shift the focus away from denying coverage as the cost cutting measure.  Unfortunately, we’ll certainly see greater wait times as the Canadians, French, and English have all seen.”

Soon we would come up against issues of rationing care with the interventions of bio-ethics boards. It seems to take too much from a “Brave New World”. 

“Addressing our illegal immigration problem would also help significantly, I believe.”

Our illegal immigration problem is no accident or quirk of a badly functioning system. The system functions evilly not from complaisant incompetence, but from malice of forethought. I had mentioned earlier the train of wrecking crew administrations.

“Not clear on what you mean here since, by definition, tax revenue increases reduce revenue shortfall.” 

There are numerous refutations of the Laffer Hypothesis. Some of these are on the internet. Part of formulating a better argument for yourself is actively trying to understand your opponent’s argument. I have a feeling I would spend all of tonight and the next day trying to explain it to you, and I have much more pleasant things to do. I don’t want to run up my blood pressure trying to untangle so much presupposing and impervious sophistry. I do credit that this sophistry is not of your doing, but you have absorbed so much of it.

“The source of the increase derives from greater business activity as the economy is stimulated; more businesses paying tax, more workers paying tax (from higher employment), and more resultant consumer spending completing the circle.”

I will give you a hint. In economics there are concept called “elasticity” and “diminishing marginal returns”.

  “Money Creation happens in numerous ways, like through increased Venture Capital financing for example.”

Money creation happens through fractional reserve banking, and debt backed asset financing. No need for something as primitive as a print shop. Venture capital financing usually involves an equity stake, and the SEC doesn’t allow high base refinancing of stock as is the case with loan assets and the Federal Reserve.

Sorry again, this works on one’s email, but not on this thread.  My apologies again.  If you are interested you will have to go to the site from the provided link then in the search bar type: THE LEGACY OF GEORGE W. BUSH’S PRESIDENCY
The Country He Inherited, The Country He Leaves Behind
It is worthwhile to take a look at as it is very concise and clear.

Correction for the House of Representative Report on the Bush legacy:
http://www.dems.gov/index.asp?Type=B_PR&SEC;={D68 CD0B2-1442-4804-9F6B-AF67DE7FF585}&DE;={FDD09C4F- E958-4E13-A92B-179C2FAC6FEA}

My apologies.

You have said this before Marshall, by definition, tax revenue increases reduce revenue shortfall.  The source of the increase derives from greater business activity as the economy is stimulated; more businesses paying tax, more workers paying tax (from higher employment), and more resultant consumer spending completing the circle.   This is an ideal that never materializes.  It is fetching to think this could work, that the money not paid in taxes by the rich would be invested in business, but facts speak for themselves; the fact are that businesses are being forced out of business or forced to drastically cut back all on Bush’s watch,  The prosperity he promised with his proposed economic practices, as seen for the eight years of his schemes, have not materialized because the less taxes the rich pay, the more they sock away in either money market accounts, stocks, or other stagnant money repositories rather than putting their granted gains into the business world.  Jobs and production have not increased. 

You speak in theory but practice speaks for itself.  If you don’t think this country is in a recession then you delude yourself.  It is true you and I do not speak the same language.  You speak in the imaginary, a world that exists only in your mind.  When Bush came into office, important businesses who intuited a non pro high-tech economy, ceased to plan for high-tech transformation of their business and reduced spending on equipment and services involving high technology.  Less Capital Expenditure (CapEx) is what caused the trend downward toward the current economic crisis.  A crisis that exists regardless of how much you wish to deny it.  Every single evening massive layoffs in industry are heard on the business and market reports.  It doesn’t matter what you say, the country is in an economic toilet. 

In 2003, economists declared George W. Bush’s worst economic record of any president since Herbert Hoover.  They have not changed their tune.  I submit that once the GWB’s administration is over, his will be found to have been the worst economic record of any president in US history.

The Internet publication SmartMoney noted in their August 11, 2008 report, Investors expected the economy to prosper under George W. Bush, a self-professed champion of enterprise. But the market and the economy laid an egg.  While he may not be completely at fault, it takes two to tango as the saying goes and what I have been claiming all along in my posts, he is the dancing man in charge.  The housing industry is in the toilet, the government will most likely have to come to the aid of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and even though there is a boom going on in the oil drilling business, every section of the country has seen escalating prices over the edge of sanity if one were to total them up, gasoline for which everybody but the rich are being crushed, and groceries, energy costs to heat or cool houses, these are only the most glaring, the glamor girls of expenditures that Americans are being squeezed to death with. 

You can try to denigrate me and the information I have provided but as I have repeatedly said, facts speak for themselves. 

In the last eight years of failed U.S. economy that started with a Clinton treasury surplus, $237 billion which George Bush squandered and has run this country into a debt of 9.2 trillion dollars that will take generations to discharge. A telling chart published by the Democratic Caucus in the House of Representatives, August 11, 2008 (today) showing the legacy may be found http://www.dems.gov/index.asp?DE={FDD09C4F-E958-4 E13-A92B-179C2FAC6FEA}&SEC;={D68CD0B2-1442-4804-9 F6B-AF67DE7FF585}&Type=B_PR  It should really be called a disendowment since legacy is too nice a word to use.

Indeed it would be prudent for you to end posting here since you provide no worthwhile information given your propensity for spinning data to portray a completely erroneous picture.

By Shenonymous, August 11 at 2:44 pm #

“under his watch the wealth of the nation has not managed to achieve zero sum but the most incredible negative balance in the history of this country”

Link please?  What do you mean by “wealth zero sum”?  What do you mean by “negative balance”?

“GWB is the source of the diminished wealth of the nation”

Nation’s wealth is measured by GDP, which is higher than at any time in history.  U.S. wealth has increased, not diminished.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gdp

“GWB’s moral and rational decision have led only to this country’s recession”

Actually - technically - we’re not in a recession, as we’ve had no quarters of negative GDP growth.  That aside, what does GWB’s moral decisions have to do with sub-prime loans?

Bottom line, Shenom; I can see that your thinking is driven chiefly by your emotions.  This means it’s unlikely that you and I are actually communicating because you’re ignoring my facts and answering with your personal judgements about ethics, morality and intentions.  You’re also throwing out inaccurate asides like “illegal war”, when we both know that no court has ruled the war illegal.

Your 3rd bullet point is just a wild mess of numbers with absolutely no context.  I assume you just cribbed these from various articles?  I’ll address a couple because the rest have no discernible meaning; they’re just numbers.

The U.S. deficit shrank from 2005-2007, though it is indeed projected to grow in 2008.  But deficit (and the national debt) aren’t measured in raw dollars. They’re measured as a percentage of GDP - which has grown MORE than the debt.  Which means the debt is entirely manageable.

As to Iraq’s surplus - this is a really good thing. You may not be aware that we’re currently negotiating with Iraq to use more of its surplus to replace U.S. reconstruction dollars.  This is the self-sufficiency that has been talked about from the start and that’s finally beginning to come to fruition.

The rest of your post is scatter shot opinion, speculation, etc… so there’s not much for me to address.  I suspect we should end this exchange because I don’t think we’re accomplishing anything given our different approaches to basic discussion.

By Paracelsus, August 11 at 4:57 pm #

Nice to have rational discourse for a change.

“It is general consensus among economists that the tax revenue increases from decreased tax rates can never reach the amount needed to close the government deficits caused by the shortfall in revenue…”

Not clear on what you mean here since, by definition, tax revenue increases reduce revenue shortfall.  The source of the increase derives from greater business activity as the economy is stimulated; more businesses paying tax, more workers paying tax (from higher employment), and more resultant consumer spending completing the circle.  Money Creation happens in numerous ways, like through increased Venture Capital financing for example.

You bring up taxation of wage labor, but I’m not clear on whether you’re suggesting that personal income tax should be abolished in favor of import duties entirely (and sales tax, I’d assume)?

And I agree with you about socialized medicine (though we already have a partly socialized system).  I believe that such a concept is unworkable in the U.S..  My solution to an extremely complicated issue would be to retain the private part of our system but change the incentives to shift the focus away from denying coverage as the cost cutting measure.  Unfortunately, we’ll certainly see greater wait times as the Canadians, French, and English have all seen.  Addressing our illegal immigration problem would also help significantly, I believe.

@Marshall

“As has always been the case historically, the Bush tax cuts *increased* federal tax revenue, so you’re just wrong on this count.”

It is general consensus among economists that the tax revenue increases from decreased tax rates can never reach the amount needed to close the government deficits caused by the shortfall in revenue as opposed to leaving tax rates alone. Look it up in Wikipedia. Money creation is the only option in making up the shortfall.

“First time I’ve heard Bush criticized for spending too much on a social program.  Now THAT’s funny.  Frankly I don’t know how to respond to that.  Do you support universal health care?  Should benefits have been cut?  I’m confused.”

Under our present paradigm, we cannot afford both guns and butter. Yet Bush has decided to increase both. It is just as well as the war budget will encourage money creation which will devalue the money that Medicare recipients receive.

As to whether we should have income taxes on wage labor, I am inclined toward funding government through import duties, and leaving wage labor untaxed. This would mean leaving the current global system. So be it.

As to socialized medicine per the American system, I worry that this would create self interested monopolies who would have no interest in the public health, only monopoly rents. I do not know how we could create a true social medical system without tax revenues being heavily stove-piped into private hands. Any ideas?

Shenonymous and all.

Sometimes, even one small thing, can prove the absolute obvious. Marshall writes this to you:

•  “And I’m dismissing your “truthout” link because, well, I don’t think you’d appreciate it if I posted links from - say - Rushlimbaugh.com.”

If that doesn’t confirm that Marshall is a complete ideologue, with nothing more than bogus straw man rhetoric, then little does. A comparison to truthout, which (while left leaning) incorporates information from multiple sources, to an asshole like Rushlimbaugh, explains exactly where Marshall is. And, that’s what one can gather from just that one statement.

Taken in totality, (as he goes on again to describe someone else (Kurgman) as ‘left-leaning’ we KNOW that Marshall cannot manage or sustain any discourse outside of an ideological lens.

He can define William Greider as a discredited hack writer, and then make the most outrageous nonsensical statement here:

•  “…As has always been the case historically, the Bush tax cuts *increased* federal tax revenue, so you’re just wrong on this count.

How in the hell can anyone claim that tax *cuts* INCREASE federal tax revenue. How insane is that?

That means that a minus equals a plus. Just move those little plus and minus symbols around, and there you have it. The less money you put in your bank account, the more you’ll have. It just won’t be in your bank.

Anyway, that’s the mentality (or lack of one) that you’re dealing with in Marshall.

On a thankfully different note, I’ve gotten about halfway through Shedon Wolsin’s book, “Democracy Incorporated. It’s superb. (but then, for 50 years, he’s been one of the best) I think all sane and rational Americans should read it.

Just a few of the recommendations, since I don’t have the time for any of my own right now,

•  “Wolin’s writing has a resonance that binds the canon of political philosophy to unfolding events and present circumstances. In “Democracy Incorporated, he contends that the institutions and practices that Americans regarded as their defense against totalitarianism—- and other forms of authoritarian domination——have failed them..” ~ Anne Norton, author of Leo Strauss and the Politics of American Empire.

•  “With his fundamental grasp of political theory and restless spirit to get at the essence of what threatens modern democracy, Wolin demonstrates that the threats to our democratic traditions and institutions are not always from the outside, but may come from within…”
~Rakesh Khurana, Harvard Business School, author of From Higher Aims to Hired Hands

•  “..he presents highly original, sober, and persuasive account of a number of tendencies in contemporary American society that constitute a significant danger for the future of constitutional democracy. If totalitarianism establishes itself in the United States, it will be in the ‘inverted’ form Wolin analyzes in this important book.”
~Raymond Geuss, Univ. of Cambridge

•  “As we’ve come to expect from Sheldon Wolin, a tightly argued and deeply revealing book about the dangers of unconstrained capitalism for our democracy.”
~Robert B. Reich, Univ of California, Berkeley

Sheldon S. Wolin is professor emeritus of politics at Princeton University.

Sodium said it succinctly and correctly as far as I am concerned.  As is your usual style Marshall, you ask bogus questions to attempt to deflect answers given.  Your criticism of my post is absurd. 

Responsible and responsibility require defintion:
1.  Liable to be required to give account, as of one’s actions or of the discharge of a duty or trust.  GWB is a servant of the people, not an independent actor.  He is required to give an account of his actions and to discharge his duty to keep the nation’ coffers as healthy as possible.  Instead under his watch the wealth of the nation has not managed to achieve zero sum but the most incredible negative balance in the history of this country.  His policies have diminished the national treasury to a status where it will take new generations of Americans to recover.

2. Being a source or cause.  GWB is the source of the diminished wealth of the nation by declaring war on a country that did not need to have a war declared on, Iraq.  Afghanistan is the country on which war should have been declared if any country deserved it.  GWB’s policies took this nation into a war that has taken it down the economic road to perdition.  Try this site for some insight into GWB’s responsibilty for the current economic state of the country.
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/12/bu sh200712

3. Able to make moral or rational decisions on one’s own and therefore answerable for one’s behavior.  GWB’s moral and rational decision have led only to this country’s recession and near depression.  Decision going to an illegal the war mainly, and
Between 2005 and 2007, the GAO report says, only ten percent of the Iraqi budget went toward reconstruction of their own country, which means that once again, American taxpayers have been picking up the slack – $48 billion US allocated for reconstruction costs since we rolled into Baghdad more than five years ago.
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/blog/2008/08/
The White House projects next year’s federal budget deficit at a record $482 billion, and that’s not counting a possible $25 billion bailout of the mortgage banks Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Or the total costs of fighting in the Middle East, largely kept in the bottom drawer where they’re hard to find. Yet this week, our Government Accountability Office issued a report concluding that by year’s end, the Iraqi government – the regime in power because we put them there – may have a budget surplus as high as $79 billion.
Iraq, as in “war torn” Iraq. A surplus! Seventy-nine billion after we’ve poured $100 billion a year into that country and more than 4100 American lives – so far. Seventy-nine billion based on the record prices we’re paying at the gas pumps, and they’re not spending it on rebuilding, on getting their electrical systems back on the grid, constructing schools and hospitals and housing, making sure everyone has food and clean water.  By the way, that includes $33 million for a new hotel, office complex and shopping mall at the Baghdad airport. Admittedly, a lot of those billions doubtless line the pockets of American contractors who’ve done little if any of what they were hired to do – and endangered Iraqis and our own troops with shoddy, dangerous workmanship.

The fact that more than a million Iraqis have been killed as a result of this illegal war is one of the worst moral disasters in which this country has ever been engaged.

Continued response to Marshall:
4. Able to be trusted or depended upon; reliable. http://www.democracyrising.us/content/view/57/164/
Democracy Rising is a national effort based in Washington, DC. Being inside-the-beltway gives the project a daily focus on the decision makers - in Congress and the Bush Administration - who are waging the illegal war and occupation of Iraq.
The Bush Family’s War Profiteering - The extent of Iraq contracts going to corporations which involve members of President George W. Bush’s family is widespread and extensive involving hundreds of millions of dollars.
5. Having the means to pay debts or fulfill obligations.  It is a well-known fact that GWB and company have driven this country into untold amounts of debt.  It has gotten worse as they realize the Republicans are not going to win the next presidential election and desire to leave the new Democratic president with a debt that is suicidal at best.
6. Required to render account; answerable: The cabinet is responsible to the Congress and the American people.  Perhaps impeachment is on the table after all.  The fact that Democratic opponents of GWB are discussing impeachment is fact enough alone to fulfill the intention of this definition.
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters/338631
Admittedly the Nation magazine is a left leaning publication.  But you certainly don’t expect me to cite a right leaning magazine.  The report still makes my point anyway.

By Paracelsus, August 9 at 9:50 am #

“Bush pushed us over the cliff with the tax revenue reductions”

As has always been the case historically, the Bush tax cuts *increased* federal tax revenue, so you’re just wrong on this count.

“and the wartime spending on top of increased Medicare benefits.”

First time I’ve heard Bush criticized for spending too much on a social program.  Now THAT’s funny.  Frankly I don’t know how to respond to that.  Do you support universal health care?  Should benefits have been cut?  I’m confused.

By Shenonymous, August 9 at 3:42 am #

“GWB and company, are completely responsible for the crappy economic state in which America finds itself.”

Yes you’ve still provided no specifics about why this would be the case.

“here are a few reports that provide substance for argument that the condition of the country is in the proverbial toilet.”

I didn’t ask you for proof the country was suffering - I asked for proof that Bush was responsible.  And I’m dismissing your “truthout” link because, well, I don’t think you’d appreciate it if I posted links from - say - Rushlimbaugh.com.

Your economyincrisis.org link: Not sure why you posted it as it has no specifics on Bush policies supposedly at fault.  In fact, it blames the Treasury and Fed - entities over which the President has no control.

William Greider is a discredited hack writer, not an economist.  Even noted left-leaning Princeton economist Paul Krugman dismissed his work as uninformed, misleading, and inaccurate.  Greider’s not a good source to support your arguments.

Florida bank closed by FDIC:
http://money.cnn.com/2008/08/01/news/companies/FDIC_ba nk_closure/

Once again - evidence of economic problems is not evidence that the current administration is responsible.  Bush did not cause banks to collapse; the sub-prime market did.  Do you believe Bush invented the sub-prime loan?

Your presstv.com link: What does Cheney and Iran have to do with the economy?  I’m baffled as to why you posted this link.

On your nytimes “Bush and the planet” link: again, this has nothing to do with the subject of our discussion.  Bush is not a believer in man being the cause of global warming.  That’s a position you may not agree with, but it’s a legitimate one.  But I promise you this: if the global warming crowd gets its way, the U.S. economy will be suffering far more than it is as the result of huge spending increases required to attempt to address this questionable issue.  So prepare yourself for the onslaught of mammoth spending increases that will be needed for this cause, for universal health care, and to rescue the inevitable collapse of Social Security that Dems are loath to even talk about.

I haven’t read your Center for American Progress link yet so I won’t speak to it until I do.

Leefeler, you said it exactly right! The DEMON “people” and Meg-Corps with the big bucks have given the administration their orders, and like the obedient goblins they are (cheNey,buSh) have used our military and our fear and patriotism to SCREW OVER the working class, ROYALLY. They have executed the largest monetary theft in all of human history, combined. Leaving our treasury and our reputation in the sewer. Getting back to your statement, “giving us the finger”.... Some of us tried to stop it right from the beginning but we were called traitors and cowards. So, To all of them, on behalf of all of us,  I say “here is the one finger salute to you”  .!.

To the posters that don’t think invading Iraq is one of the factors in the high oil prices,  you must be living on a different planet then the rest of us. IT IS THE MAJOR factor in the price of oil today. The stock market hates unpredictability and instability such as war and destruction. When Wall Street analysts can’t see some sort of linear production from manufacturers and the like, they head for the hills. Look what the market did after 9/11. Someone posted that oil prices did not rise when we invaded Iraq. This is somewhat true.  The White House and it’s extensive propaganda machine, i.e.  THE MSM had the U.S. brainwashed sheeple-public, so utterly convinced that the the Iraqi people would be licking our asses, as we totally destroyed their 5000 year old buildings and mounuments. They would be “throwing rose at our feet”  as we murdered and tortured and imprisoned thousands and thousands of innocent and adolescent civilians. “Roses at our feet” were Rumsfelds exact words.  Well,  when the roses didn’t drop and the licking of asses didn’t materialize, and American soldiers were dying at 30-40 plus a day, wiser people started to realize this invasion and occupation was not going to be the cake walk so many were duped into believing. That’s when the price of oil started to rise, and rise it did until just about 10 days ago. Also, everytime the Knucklehead buSh alludes to invading Iran, the speculators go to price fixing and salivating.

  I was so surprised to see that the stocks that made money during this occupation were oil, defense, security and military industrial complex companies. I was equally surprised to come to the realization that buSh and cheNey have stock in those very same type of companies. Do you want to hear something even more surprising? Most if not all of their relatives, and closest friends, even acquaintances have ownership or stock in those very same companies. WOW, some people people have all the luck!  Stuff like that never happens to me and all my relatives and close friends and acquaintances. Man what’s the odds, they just happen to own those stocks and companies, just as the people of Iraq were going to invade the United States of America?  They would be so stealth as they traversed MILES and MILES of open desert. Then, sneak their invasion force through several well militarily armed, unfriendly NATO countries going undetected.  Knowing this to be a sure success,  they would then proceed to cross the ENTIRE ATLANTIC OCEAN to surprise attack us, mounted upon their trusty camels. This being that was all all they had, as a result of enduring 12 years of sanctions and the daily bombings that were imposed by the U.N. and carried out by the U.S. and NATO.

Ocjim (and all)

I’m not sure if this link was included in the several that shenonymous posted on this thread, but it’s an excellent piece, (the stuff from TomDispatch always is) So, it might be helpful to send along to your friends. Then again, unless these McCain supporters can come to understand that he is as much a part of this NON-accident as the current thugs are, it may not help.

Follow This Dime: Why Misgovernment Was No Accident in George W. Bush’s Washington

Monday 04 August 2008
by: Thomas Frank, TomDispatch.com

http://www.truthout.org/article/follow-this-dime?print

(I’ve crossposted this on another thread)

By Shenonymous, August 9 at 3:42 am

•  “…Nevertheless for the benefit of others, here are a few reports that provide substance for argument that the condition of the country is in the proverbial toilet.

Dear Professor Shenonymous,

And oh what a BENEFIT IT IS!!!!

This WEALTH of information and resources has just assisted me in clinching two major projects. A reminder that more than just amusement, knowledge is more valuable than gold, (even if one doesn’t have projects that are further benefited by it).

I hadn’t read the piece at truthout yet, even though the site is pretty much my bible. So, for those addicted to brain/mind exercise….INDULGE!!

Thanks Prof.

~~~~~

Lefty, you’re right about Marshall. Odd that he would claim to have started out poor, but has earned everything he has, which is a moderate measure, in terms of LA standards. He says he took advantage of ‘opportunity’. Now, exactly what OPPORTUNITIES were those, and how did he access them?

This is not a rhetorical question at all, because my sister and I were just talking this up not long ago. Her family is probably in about the same ‘classification’ as Marshall here. Moderate income for LA standards, since her husband has a successful medical practice, and she too works hard at making it such.  This came up as a comparison to the complaints that Obama is an ‘elitist’ or somehow ‘privileged’, except of course when we look at his history, we know he didn’t start out at any of that, and basically still isn’t. He didn’t use his hard earned education to work for Wall Street, though he certainly could have. He went into academia instead, and anybody who knows anything, understands that academics don’t get rich. Nobody goes into teaching, expecting to get rich. (or they shouldn’t)

Anyway, HER point was to say that when the system works, (that is people using their birth given talents to work hard, and take advantages of opportunities) we call it one thing if they happen to be black, (affirmative action that then turns them into ‘elitists’) and it’s just “The American Dream” when it happens to anyone else. One that they DESERVE, as a given for having been born white.

I also remember her saying that they didn’t net as much $money$ in the Clinton years, because they did pay more taxes. On the other hand, since the Bush destruction began, they might be ‘personally’ better off, (by a few dollars) but their surrounding community is in economic despair, because all of THOSE boats have gone under. What a paradox for Marshall to claim that he believes a rising tide lifts all boats, and fail to see that a falling tide sinks all of the same. But, the greedy and the selfish never see it that way, until it’s too late. They’re the ones who will be jumping out of buildings and shit when the crash reaches that far up their mountain sides.

“The U.S. economy is already tottering. We recently witnessed the second-largest bank failure in U.S. history, and there are fears that as many as 150 banks could fail over the next 12 to 18 months. “

Worse problems?

”[[t]he $330 billion auction-rate securities market ...]”

http://www.prosefights.org/thecanadian/theca