Carl,

Nobody is arguing that the stimulus money did absolutely nothing. People’s very justifiable grievances are along the lines of effectiveness. Do you think you could save one job if you spent $200,000? Of course!! A bill that assigns $700 Billion to ‘save jobs’ and only mitigates the unemployment spike by 1%?? That seems crazy to me. Government run programs run productivity and efficiency into the ground. Not to mention that government ‘intervention’ is what got us into this mess in the first place. In addition to this, there remains the issue of steady state vs. temporary dependence on the government. Surely we can agree that the best steady state condition is not to conitnue paying the government more money so they can give it to your neighbor? Steady state should be along the lines of a self sustaining business models independent of the government. Everybody knows that when we see a spike in government spending, rarely does that spending return to its pre-spike levels. Just look at the world history of the federal income tax.

The governments role should be to facilitate free markets that are self correcting. For example, to discourage the recent credit crisis (which is still going on), they could have published accurate information about what is really going on – which is one main reason people invest in U.S. markets – transparency. The government could have published the real leverage ratio for Bear Stearns, instead of the one they self report. They could have published the real value of the real estate collateral used in securing credit. Underwriting mortgage risk is basically a commodity. In other words, the government could have helped make things more transparent. The truth is that we are seeing more and more ‘ends justify the means’ mentalities in Washington, and people with their own agendas that they arrogantly assume should be executed behind closed doors because ‘they know better’.

The UN inherited the disposition of lands taken from the Ottomans, who lost them in ww1. The Ottomans went to war and lost.

The UN divided the land. The Pals went to war and lost.

If you don’t like the UN’s vote, fine, but then, go pick and choose, support the votes that work for you and oppose the votes that don’t work for you. Fine. Just don’t ask for sympathy. And piffle to consistency. When you jurisdiction-shop, pick the rulings you like and skip the ones you don’t, why bother with the authority of the UN, you are merely saying what you want.

The UN guarantees, or advocates, self-determination, ie ethnic territorial nationalism, aka Zionism.

The notion that the parties lived in peace is fine, when there were minimal Jews. With the arrival, of European Jews, from the early 1900s on, the locals decided that they would no longer live in peace and extended guerilla war ensued. Arafat’s uncle went to Hitler and asked that Jewish emigration be stopped.

If the land is big enough for two peoples undivided the land is big enough for two peoples, divided.

Anyway, the Pals have, nominally, some of them, accepted the 1949 borders, called ‘1967’ borders, thus defeating your argument that they resist their loss of lands. Others still reject the UN, by calling for destruction Israel, and have still not accepted the UN vote.

Finally, this IS peace, mideast style, the Arabs and Muslims here are as peaceful towards Jews as they are towards Christina, Copts, Kurds, shia v sunni, and all the other ‘peaceful’ regimes.

The Pals must apologize to the UN for selective compliance, pay reparations to the Jews for sixty years of warfare, imprison their own war criminals, the child murderers, and rewrite their own history books to describe their history of self-destruction. Suicide as nationalism.

The Jews held out 2000 years. The Pals are whiners and war criminals, and child murderers; I doubt that they can hold out except as thugs and murderers, for any duration.

Your purported Jewishness (what does ‘Jewish hertage’ mean?) means that under the Right of Return, (or maybe not, depending on ‘heritage’) you can go to Israel, and run for office, and vote your views. Many in Israel share some of your views. But even in democracy, Israel style, your views are repudiated or at least outvoted. Bon Voyage.

The Pals made a political mistake, and make it worse every day. No sympathy for their self-created hardship.

How come there is never any mention on some of the other provisions in this bill that should also be ruled unconstitutional?

Provisions that are in that bill that have absolutely nothing to do with health care, like student loans.

I would like to know what student loans have to do with health care. Why is there a provision in there for this, when it does not address the reason that student loans has any impact on health care.

It took 2700 pages to write a law that should have been about 10 pages long. Does the administration really think that 2700 pages was necessary? Yes they do.

This bill is more about the Federal governments control over our daily lives than it is about health care.

Go back to the drawing board, and address things like tort control, and competition between state lines. Really address the fraud, waste, and abuse of our health care system.

These things were never addressed in the bill. Why? Because our politicians have to pay back political favor’s. Can’t tick off those personal injury lawyers now can we?

Just how much money do they contribute to the political campaigns of these idiots that want total control of our lives? Whatever the amount, it must be ridiculously, staggeringly high, for them to totally dismiss it as part of any health care bill.

Come on, why is there not a bigger deal made of this? Why do we not hear anything more about that?

People we are being taken for a ride with this health care bill, and we better wake up to that fact, before it becomes law.

AMERICAN SPORTSMAN

One of the acts of becoming a man in an African tribe is killing a big game animal, such as a lion. Similarly, one of the first things a kid does to earn his place in the tribe is to get his first deer. It is a life changing experience. Just think about all the sweat and labor needed to carry the mule deer carcass up a ravine or a steep, muddy, snow covered slope in November. It really takes it out of you.

The reason you don’t have many young people willing to do this anymore is a lack of opportunity. It is not just urban living or computers, although that is certainly part of it. Today’s American male is either a pasty-faced liberal who eats only vegetables and granola or a street thug who would freak out if he was left alone for a few days in the Canadian Rockies. Our niches don’t include the Wild Outdoors, at least in a traditional sense.

I once worked in the U.S. Forest Service on the White River National Forest in Rifle, Colorado. We had a cabin south of town, about forty miles up West Divide Creek called Cayton Guard Station. Once in awhile, we would go up there and work or spend the night. Very rustic and spartan. Only a wood burning stove. No computer, no electicity, no television, no cell phone towers, no I-Pod. Very traditional. You would not find too many Forest Service employees today willing to stay the night at Cayton Guard Station, or anywhere like it.

In Sept. 2006, several seasonal employees working in the backcountry of the Sawtooth National Recreation Area (Sawtooth National Forest, Idaho) were about ready to head back home for school in Ogden, Utah. One early fall night in Sept., these girls heard the howling of a pack of wolves and panicked. They called their supervisor on the radio and requested a helicopter pick-up out of the backcountry. They were afraid for their lives. The Forest Service dispatched a helicopter to pick-them up and remove them from the backcountry the next day.

Simply put, today’s Forest Rangers do not know how to protect themselves and even if they did, are probably prevented by regulation from doing so. Some of them are also superstitious and ignorant. The fact is, there has never been a documented case in North America where a wolf attacked a human. Coyotes yes, wolves no, according to Dr. Mike Gibeau, Carnivore Specialist, Parcs Canada, Lake Louise Field Office, Alberta, Canada (Personal communication, 2004).

You can drop the fake Obe one Kenobe stuff, Fred, and I’ll take you seriously and I won’t disrespect you, either.

As your article points out, insiders are not always right. But also, they aren’t always trying to be. A lot of insiders sell stock pretty much all the time, just to support their lifestyles. But they also have other assets and lines of credit, etc., and they also have some control, just like the rest of us, regarding discretionary spending.

They’re also human beings with emotions and feelings of loyalty and pride and so on towards their employers (especially if they’re running them.) When they see their company stock pummeled down below what they think is fair, they hold back. They won’t sell.

But they’re not necessarily long-term investors trying to hold on ’till the market eventually peaks years down the road. Again, this is just another form of income for many of them and anyway, they’re already overexposed to just this one company and they know they should rebalance anyway.

So what happens is that once the market begins to get back into territory they can possibly stomach as remotely fair, they start selling again. And because they haven’t been doing it for a while, there’s some pent-up selling at the front.

Bottom line: Reasonable people will disagree, but I think insider trading stats are a lot more helpful at the top of a bull (when you’re looking for the one person who doesn’t believe we’re headed straight to the moon) than they are when we’re still digging our way out of a recession.

I am aware of the trends in your previous posts. Obviously, the Japan and Germany were going to reclaim their positions as the primary drivers of growth in their respective regions, but I don’t believe that that, even in addition to the productivity gains, is the major reason behind the decline in U.S. manufacturing. I say decline because that’s exactly what it is, a decline. The U.S. consistently favors financial services and agriculture in trade negotiations, so the U.S. manufacturing sector doesn’t get the attention that it deserves in the resulting agreements. The recent free trade agreement between the U.S. and South Korea is just one example. Beef producers and wine makers are reportedly the big winners. The U.S. sells approximately 5,000 cars in South Korea and South Korea sells about 500,000 here and the agreement won’t do a whole lot to change that ratio. Countries like Japan and China have used mercantilist trade practices to take market share and jobs away from U.S. companies. The U.S. government has largely maintained a lassez faire economic policy despite this. In Japan’s case it was for geopolitical reasons, primarily to promote the security relationship by ensuring the basing of U.S. troops in Japan. In China’s case it is to support the effort of U.S. multinationals abroad, which is one of the biggest reason why the president has failed to label China a currency manipulator. Polticial leaders need to get elected and this is where the big corporations come in with their huge donations to political campaigns. If a candidate is beholden to corporate interests then he/she will not do something that will benefit working class people if it is counter to the interest of corporate donors. If you say that the U.S. is trying to cling to industries of the past then what do you have to say about the solar panel industry? This is an industry of the future, but the U.S. allowed Chinese companies to dump thousands of solar panels in the U.S. market. If your someone who says that the U.S. shouldn’t pick winners and losers, that’s fine and dandy, but the end result is that if the U.S. doesn’t subsize this industry it will allow China to pick the winners. U.S. companies would be at an even greater disadvantage if the U.S. didn’t subsidize solar panel makers. The mercantilist tactics of China have succeeded in putting U.S. companies out of business and seizing market share for Chinese companies. This is in addition to the tariffs and taxes that are in place to discourage U.S. exports to China, which is why the trade deficit is $200 billion a year.

Mr. Karlgaard spins a nice yarn, but it does not even hold together as a scarf, much less as an actual sweater. Yes, Kodak managers knew that the future belonged to digital photography as long ago as the 70’s. They also knew about other product lines such as copiers and laser printers, which could have been more significant than they were.

Their response to fading profit margins was not to focus on less profitable products with a future, but to double down on the film market without touching their unit costs of manufacturing (UCM). After all, so what if their labor costs were twice the regional average? Kodak was still making huge profits, declining margins notwithstanding.

It was easier for Kodak managers to continue running Kodak as a film company whose other product lines could be slowly cannibalized to feed the dying cash cow. They could have made the film operation a smaller, nimbler entity which provided cash to support the growth of future business lines. Instead, they fed the calves to the cow.

Kodak management refused to do the tough work when the times were ripe. They could have benefited greatly from being taken over by a company like Bain or by a raider like Carl Icahn. Instead, their management kept milking the cash cow, protecting margins by killing R&D in areas where there was indeed a future.

Kodak management protected themselves from raiders by putting in place “poison pill” terms to their bylaws. Those terms prevented shareholders from selling to people who would take over and make Kodak a smaller but more profitable company. As a result, today Kodak is a large but empty shell – a shadow of its former self.

Even today, Kodak management could save the company, but only by sacrificing themselves. If the board gets rid of the poison pill, suitors will start calling. Instead of being a thoroughbred en route to the dog food factory, Kodak would become a work horse with a long but less glamorous future ahead of them.

Peggy your fawning over Mitt constant dissing of Newt is wearing thin, very thin. I respect the role that venture capital firms play in our economy but to equate thier activities with being job creators is foolish and wrong. Mitt Romney may well be a great manager of money but that in and of itself does not make him a job creator. Those are the folks that own operate and build the companies that really create jobs and wealth. Most do it without Venture capitalist using their own resources and risking ALL to have an opportunity to move up the economic ladder. Bane capital and its like move when these companies need money to make their ideas into a reality.

Do we want someone whose idea of creating jobs is to do a better job of allocating money to enterprises who he thinks is worthy? Whose claim to be best suited to be president is to CREATE jobs himself when that is not true. We have the ultimate in venture capitolist in the White House now in Obama. He believes it is the role of government to pick the winners. That is what Mitt has done and I have not heard him detail how he will govern just that he know how to pick better than the guy now in th WH.

Newt,Santorum and Perry on the other hand have stated a plan and desperate need to restructure the government especially the regulators and the gigantic bureacratic structure that exists. Only Newt has put forth such a plan.

The fate of the nation is at stake and I am not comforted by Peggy Noonan’s missives that Mitt is the best we have he is not. She also only creates words nothing of substance.

The occupation of Palestine by Europeans was always going to be a problem.

=

this European colonization goes back to the Greeks under Alexander 300 BC and to the Romans under the various emperors as successors to the Greek/ Ptolemaic/ Seleucid rule, , leading to the Roman destruction of the Jewish state in the two jewish rebellions, 70 AD and 130 AD

after that Palestine was occupied by the Persians or Parthians ,and after that by the Arabs during the Muslim expansion of the 700s, , culminating in the Ottoman occupation (after internal geopolitical Islamic power struggles) , from the 1500s to the 1900s, 1917, to be exact and the 1920s allocation of those lands, first in the league of nations and later in the UN, ‘back’ to the Jews

why do you pick one START DATE and others pick others?

in general, these conflicts are approached with territorial compromise, which was the 1947 UN vote, which was promptly rejected by war by the Arabs, who have not stopped since, including yesterday, losing one battle after another, and then crying their own version of victim-hood, most lately the ‘nakbah’ of 1947, or the israeli massacre at sea – we are tired of the Palestinian nakbah, you should be aware, as a self-created hardship, the criminal who murders her parents and then claims judicial sympathy for being an orphan

==

many of us are tired of old grievance,s including the Arab one, the African American one, the Armenian one, the Kurdish one, the Irish i know remember the British in northern Ireland.

and oh yeah, Osama went to war because of the christian reconquest of Andalusia

in Serbia the wars of the 1300s are remembered as yesterday

so why start and end with jewish victimology?

= =

beyond that the UN charter provides for self-determination,which is interpreted as ethnic territorial nationalism, aka the jewish state

mh

The biggest financial problem facing America today is the exploding number of public sector employees. Covering their benefits, salaries and retirements is a reason why the government is in such debt. People seem to want to talk about budgets and deficits, but it really is all about hiring – in other words – HOW the money is spent. The percentage of public to private sector workers in the US is way out of wack for the amount of taxes collected. And Obamacare explodes that further.

Now – to explain here, this is no rap on the employees themselves, it is a rap on those who vote for hiring more of them – when we cannot afford those already on the payroll. I see an estimate posted in these comments about health care being about 17% of the US economy. So – how many incremental government workers will it take to administer that? And what will that do to an already bleak economy?

The way to expand health care coverage is to cap lawsuits and allow insurance companies to sell policies across state lines. It is government, through Medicare and Medicaid who sets the prices for most health care services – why do you think MRI’s cost what they do? Because providers know what they will be reimbursed- and price accordingly.

I object to the debate-less and rapid-fire way this legislation was shoved through our legislature last year. Many of those in Congress admitted that they did not read the bill prior to voting on it. For something this far-reaching, I just think we should expect more.