News Stories

[SeijiSensei]

I take it you're basing this analysis on an examination of the actual budgetary figures. If not, perhaps you should start with this.

Most of the budget consists of things that are pretty uncontrollable -- Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, and debt interest. That's why there's a division between "discretionary" and "non-discretionary" spending. The biggest discretionary item in the budget is defense, which doubled in size during the Bush administration from about $300 bn in 2000 to over $600 bn in 2008. These four items alone constitute most of Federal spending.

If you look at the figures for FY 2009 versus FY 2008, however, you'll see that spending grew $1 trillion over the year. Fully three-quarters of that increases comes from the "commerce and housing credit" line item which includes TARP, Federal Deposit Insurance, and Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac.

I'd like to see defense spending reduced in half or more myself, but that won't happen any time soon. We kept hearing about the "peace dividend" that was supposed to follow upon the fall of the Berlin Wall. I'm still waiting.

[justinstrife]

Originally Posted by mikita

And who will replace them? "power corrupts." inevitably even the best will become disillusioned and fall from where they were. the world is a screwed up place, even if you have good intentions it's too little compared to the tide of self interest that is prevalent everywhere. you can only comprimise, and choose whoever you think is better, and hope for the best.

Put term limits up, dump the quirks, dump the pension, cut their salaries in half, make them accountable for what they do in and out of office, there's a few things that could be done.

Being in Congress was never suppose to be a real job or career.

[justinstrife]

Originally Posted by SeijiSensei

I take it you're basing this analysis on an examination of the actual budgetary figures. If not, perhaps you should start with this.

Most of the budget consists of things that are pretty uncontrollable -- Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, and debt interest. That's why there's a division between "discretionary" and "non-discretionary" spending. The biggest discretionary item in the budget is defense, which doubled in size during the Bush administration from about $300 bn in 2000 to over $600 bn in 2008. These four items alone constitute most of Federal spending.

If you look at the figures for FY 2009 versus FY 2008, however, you'll see that spending grew $1 trillion over the year. Fully three-quarters of that increases comes from the "commerce and housing credit" line item which includes TARP, Federal Deposit Insurance, and Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac.

I'd like to see defense spending reduced in half or more myself, but that won't happen any time soon. We kept hearing about the "peace dividend" that was supposed to follow upon the fall of the Berlin Wall. I'm still waiting.

Two wars tends to do that. Especially when you have to rebuild the military after Clinton cut into it a little too deeply. The same happened when Reagan came along. The Military was extremely underfunded under Carter. As things cool down in Iraq, resources can be transferred over to Afghanistan. Eventually costs can be cut even further as more troops leave the Middle East(though we will never be fully out of the area. Ever).

If I had the power, I'd phase out Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. But alas, I do not. The Military is a vital and Constitutional part of this country. The other three, not so much.

[LynnieS]

Originally Posted by justinstrife

The numbers I'm hearing now is 1.9 trillion. When do we as citizens wake up to the corruption in our Government and vote all of these elitists out of office? I don't give a damn if they have an R, a D, or an I infront of their name. Boot them out!

To cut the deficit, you have 3 ways, IMHO: Raise taxes, cut spending or boost the economy.

Raising taxes is unpopular. People tend to look for loopholes. There are often tries to make the action into hurting the so-called middle class, families, and businesses; "preventing" this means opening loopholes that people can exploit as well. People also don't trust the politicians to spend the money well but on "pork" projects benefiting their own constituencies instead. A different type of "NIMBY" attitude, in a way.

Cutting spending is also not that effective, IMHO. Depending on who is doing the cutting or what is being cut, people are going to be hurt, and replacement on the private sector side may not be there. There are a lot of "sacred cows" out there that people do not want to touch. Again, "NIMBY"; you can cut everyone else's pet project, but don't you touch mine.

Boosting the economy is probably the most acceptable to everyone since a rising economy floats all boats. At the moment, it's also the least likely to get off the ground. People talk the good talk with a lot of key words, but words != concrete and successful action. You pretty much have to raise taxes and increase spending, IMHO; the private sector alone won't be able to manage to create enough jobs to drop the real unemployment rate down past 15% or less. The upcoming spending bill, I have doubts over its success. There was also some talk earlier about how the obligation to Fannie and Freddie wasn't being included in the need for money. (1) Interest on the debt issued by the U.S. and (2) possible lower demand on U.S. debt are going to be a worry as well.

I wonder if something like the Selective Service for politics, but on an one-time per person only basis, would work better than what is out there today. It's basically a feedback system now; you get elected, you bring money into your area, and you get re-elected. The longer you stay, the more powerful you become, and that means more money and (usually) re-election.

[iLney]

Alas, more taxes and more spending, which means more Government?

Common, how long has we been running Keynesian economics? Try something new!

[justinstrife]

More taxes is not going to do anything to help the economy. No way, no how. Not in our current situation. People have already cut back spending as it is. Increasing taxes, will only make people spend even less. Less private spending = less consumption and jobs. There needs to be a huge cut in Government spending. As it is, Government Unemployment is far less than that of Private Unemployment. Add in the fact that the average Government worker makes more than the average Private worker... It's a recipe for disaster.

[SeijiSensei]

Originally Posted by iLney

how long has we been running Keynesian economics?

Since 1980, I'd say it's been a little under a year now.

Richard Posner was one of the leading lights in the Chicago "law and economics" movement with close ties to Milton Friedman. Now he writes about How I Became a Keynesian.

[Vexx]

It does seem as if one votes on a party to decide which half of "guvmint" you want to blow more money than you have on at the federal level. Both political parties have been completely irresponsible in that regard - even if certain people within each party have tried to effect improvements.

The infrastructure/socialservices side suffers from:
1) rampant inefficiencies
2) privatization without accountability or results.
3) "pork barreling" (interests of one district outweighing needs of the nation)
4) A lack of consensus about just what constitutes a necessary infrastructure.
The military side suffers from:
1) rampant inefficiencies.
2) privatization without accountability or results.
3) "pork barreling"
4) An unwarranted tendency to wave the flag to silence critique.

BOTH parties are to blame for each item on each list - boondoggles galore.

[LynnieS]

Originally Posted by iLney

Alas, more taxes and more spending, which means more Government?

Common, how long has we been running Keynesian economics? Try something new!

Not in a time of crisis, IMHO, and looking at the stats coming out over the past few weeks (esp. with the 4Q GDP numbers being pretty new and likely to be revised downward like earlier), a crisis is looking more likely every day. You should be experimenting during the boom times when you have both time and money as luxuries, IMHO, but it rarely happens since people get... complacent.

You also need to have a set of clear and easily understood goals to work toward, and that has to be done consistently. This isn't happening anywhere to any major degree that I can tell. Damn it.

[justinstrife]

Originally Posted by Vexx

It does seem as if one votes on a party to decide which half of "guvmint" you want to blow more money than you have on at the federal level. Both political parties have been completely irresponsible in that regard - even if certain people within each party have tried to effect improvements.

The infrastructure/socialservices side suffers from:
1) rampant inefficiencies
2) privatization without accountability or results.
3) "pork barreling" (interests of one district outweighing needs of the nation)
4) A lack of consensus about just what constitutes a necessary infrastructure.
The military side suffers from:
1) rampant inefficiencies.
2) privatization without accountability or results.
3) "pork barreling"
4) An unwarranted tendency to wave the flag to silence critique.

BOTH parties are to blame for each item on each list - boondoggles galore.

This is correct of course. You won't get any arguments from me here.

[mg1942]

Fears Rise of Euro Government Default

Spoiler for ...:

Financial markets swooned Thursday amid rising fears of a government debt default in Europe, highlighting the seriousness of the challenges facing the euro currency as fiscally challenged countries like Greece, Portugal and Spain dig themselves out of debt.

After a brief respite early this week, the cost of insuring against default the debt of euro-zone members with large budget deficits jumped late Wednesday and rattled investors more broadly on Thursday.

While Greece and Portugal have felt investors' fire in recent days, now even larger economies like Spain are starting to come under pressure from worries about their weakened public finances.

Blue-chip stock indexes in Spain and Portugal slumped nearly 6% and 5%, respectively, while an index of Europe's 600 biggest companies dropped 2.7%. The euro sank more than 1% against the U.S. dollar to an eight-month low of $1.3727 and lost 3% of its value against the Japanese yen.

The global economic downturn, and extensive government spending to fight it, have led to major fiscal problems in Europe, especially for less-dynamic economies like Greece, Portugal, Ireland and Spain. Such countries took advantage of their membership in the 16-nation euro bloc during the boom by borrowing at unusually low interest rates. But now, investors are worried about how they will reduce yawning budget deficits that exceed 12% of their economic output in the case of Greece and Ireland.

The debt troubles of Europe's weaker economies are also now raising questions about the nature of the euro zone, where countries share a currency but not financial policies. Some have speculated that a weaker country, like Greece, might end up falling out of the union or, worse, require a bailout by European policy makers or the International Monetary Fund. Such concerns are prompting investors to take a more careful look at the health of individual euro economies.

"A year ago, everyone assumed that these countries were the same," said Brian Yelvington, a strategist at fixed-income brokerage Knight Libertas. "Now people are trying to figure out how far Greek [bonds] should trade from Portugal."

European policy makers are trying to pressure wayward countries like Greece into taking stronger action to fix their finances. Greek markets eased a little earlier this week as investors awaited a move by the European Commission, the European Union's executive arm, to endorse Greece's budget plans.

However, the prospect of debt fears spreading to other countries like Spain creates new, and bigger, problems. Greece contributes only about 2.5% of the euro area's economic output; a larger economy like Spain or Italy, by contrast, would be harder to bail out.

Such concerns have weighed on Europe's single currency for many weeks, pushing its value down from a recent high of about $1.51 in December. To some extent, that is a boon for Europe's economy, since it makes it easier for German and other European exporters to sell their wares to consumers in the U.S. However, a sharp slide in the euro would erode its credibility.

Investors' worries were particularly sharp on Thursday. Prices of government bonds issued by Spain and Portugal sank along with their stock markets, while the cost to insure these bonds against default using insurance-like contracts known as credit-default swaps soared.

While Greece's bonds persevered Thursday, the cost to insure against a Greek sovereign default using credit-default swaps hit $429,000 annually to insure $10 million of debt, a new record, according to data provider CMA DataVision. Similar costs for Portugal and Spain also leaped. In a worrisome sign, concerns about the fiscal woes of European governments are starting to infect corners of the credit markets that European banks and companies rely on to raise money.

Prices of credit-default swaps tied to European companies with stronger credit ratings, including banks, also rose on Thursday, with the cost of insuring the debt of Spanish and Portuguese banks jumping in particular. Even banks like the U.K.'s Barclays PLC and Germany's Deutsche Bank AG saw their debt-default insurance costs rise.

Investors may be betting that banks and other European companies are likely to suffer if European governments like Greece are forced to institute austerity measures like higher taxes that end up snuffing out economic recoveries. Banks also are large buyers of European government bonds, and may be selling bonds or buying insurance using credit-default swaps to protect themselves from feared credit-ratings downgrades of countries. Furthermore, banks may be buying insurance to offset insurance they actually sold to other players, observers say.

Any fresh round of fear surrounding banks, meanwhile, would also imperil the companies that borrow from them.

In a recent report, analysts at Morgan Stanley said sovereign debt fears could, in a worse-than-expected scenario, end up hurting companies by leading governments to take actions that hurt their economic growth.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by mg1942

Fears Rise of Euro Government Default

Spoiler for ...:

Financial markets swooned Thursday amid rising fears of a government debt default in Europe, highlighting the seriousness of the challenges facing the euro currency as fiscally challenged countries like Greece, Portugal and Spain dig themselves out of debt.

After a brief respite early this week, the cost of insuring against default the debt of euro-zone members with large budget deficits jumped late Wednesday and rattled investors more broadly on Thursday.

While Greece and Portugal have felt investors' fire in recent days, now even larger economies like Spain are starting to come under pressure from worries about their weakened public finances.

Blue-chip stock indexes in Spain and Portugal slumped nearly 6% and 5%, respectively, while an index of Europe's 600 biggest companies dropped 2.7%. The euro sank more than 1% against the U.S. dollar to an eight-month low of $1.3727 and lost 3% of its value against the Japanese yen.

The global economic downturn, and extensive government spending to fight it, have led to major fiscal problems in Europe, especially for less-dynamic economies like Greece, Portugal, Ireland and Spain. Such countries took advantage of their membership in the 16-nation euro bloc during the boom by borrowing at unusually low interest rates. But now, investors are worried about how they will reduce yawning budget deficits that exceed 12% of their economic output in the case of Greece and Ireland.

The debt troubles of Europe's weaker economies are also now raising questions about the nature of the euro zone, where countries share a currency but not financial policies. Some have speculated that a weaker country, like Greece, might end up falling out of the union or, worse, require a bailout by European policy makers or the International Monetary Fund. Such concerns are prompting investors to take a more careful look at the health of individual euro economies.

"A year ago, everyone assumed that these countries were the same," said Brian Yelvington, a strategist at fixed-income brokerage Knight Libertas. "Now people are trying to figure out how far Greek [bonds] should trade from Portugal."

European policy makers are trying to pressure wayward countries like Greece into taking stronger action to fix their finances. Greek markets eased a little earlier this week as investors awaited a move by the European Commission, the European Union's executive arm, to endorse Greece's budget plans.

However, the prospect of debt fears spreading to other countries like Spain creates new, and bigger, problems. Greece contributes only about 2.5% of the euro area's economic output; a larger economy like Spain or Italy, by contrast, would be harder to bail out.

Such concerns have weighed on Europe's single currency for many weeks, pushing its value down from a recent high of about $1.51 in December. To some extent, that is a boon for Europe's economy, since it makes it easier for German and other European exporters to sell their wares to consumers in the U.S. However, a sharp slide in the euro would erode its credibility.

Investors' worries were particularly sharp on Thursday. Prices of government bonds issued by Spain and Portugal sank along with their stock markets, while the cost to insure these bonds against default using insurance-like contracts known as credit-default swaps soared.

While Greece's bonds persevered Thursday, the cost to insure against a Greek sovereign default using credit-default swaps hit $429,000 annually to insure $10 million of debt, a new record, according to data provider CMA DataVision. Similar costs for Portugal and Spain also leaped. In a worrisome sign, concerns about the fiscal woes of European governments are starting to infect corners of the credit markets that European banks and companies rely on to raise money.

Prices of credit-default swaps tied to European companies with stronger credit ratings, including banks, also rose on Thursday, with the cost of insuring the debt of Spanish and Portuguese banks jumping in particular. Even banks like the U.K.'s Barclays PLC and Germany's Deutsche Bank AG saw their debt-default insurance costs rise.

Investors may be betting that banks and other European companies are likely to suffer if European governments like Greece are forced to institute austerity measures like higher taxes that end up snuffing out economic recoveries. Banks also are large buyers of European government bonds, and may be selling bonds or buying insurance using credit-default swaps to protect themselves from feared credit-ratings downgrades of countries. Furthermore, banks may be buying insurance to offset insurance they actually sold to other players, observers say.

Any fresh round of fear surrounding banks, meanwhile, would also imperil the companies that borrow from them.

In a recent report, analysts at Morgan Stanley said sovereign debt fears could, in a worse-than-expected scenario, end up hurting companies by leading governments to take actions that hurt their economic growth.

i think i remember reading a few weeks back that said 1/4 of the pop in Greece work for the government and that successive government can't/won't cut down on public employment due to public riotunrest.

[Knight Hawk]

Man jailed for raping woman, 86, at Bradford care home

A 19-year-old man has been given an indeterminate jail sentence for the kidnap and rape of an 86-year-old woman in a Bradford care home.

A judge at Bradford Crown Court told Dale Boocock, from the Woodside area of the city, his crime was "appalling".

Boocock, who admitted rape and kidnap, was told he would serve a minimum of four years and nine months.

The elderly woman was assaulted at a home in the Buttershaw area of Bradford in the early hours of 15 September.

She needed hospital treatment at the time of the attack and has since died of natural causes.

The court heard Boocock had been on bail for a series of house burglaries at the time of the attack. The judge, Recorder Colin Burn, said Boocock would probably serve "very much longer" than the minimum sentence.

He said the defendant posed a significant risk to the public, particularly vulnerable people.

He told him: "You were released on police bail for September 13 matters and you went on to commit other offences of rape and kidnap, perpetrated against an elderly, infirm and extremely vulnerable victim living in nursing accommodation.

"You had no thought for her whatsoever. You forcibly removed her from her bed, you dragged her outside at night into the garden, causing her injury, and you raped her outside, leaving her in dreadful distress and unrest on the ground.

"I have no doubt that, whatever the eventual cause of death was, her prognosis deteriorated rapidly as a result of what you did that night and she died two months later."

'Beyond belief'

Det Ch Insp Jon Hoyle, of West Yorkshire Police, said: "Dale Boocock has been sentenced to imprisonment after pleading guilty to the kidnap and rape of an 86-year-old lady, the circumstances of which can only be described as vile and beyond belief.

"The only consolation I can offer the family is that Boocock was arrested soon after the offence and has been dealt with by the courts quickly and he will remain in prison for a very long time.

"However, this will never make up for the loss of a wife, a mother, a grandmother, great grandmother and friend, after she tragically passed away just seven weeks after the incident.

"During my short involvement with this family it became apparent that she was a very special person to many."

Anchor Homes, which owns the Bradford care home, welcomed Boocock's sentence.

Area manager Louise Gibson said: "Following the attack, we organised counselling sessions for staff at the home and we extended this help to residents.

"We spoke to the next of kin of every resident, offering them support and reassurance and the opportunity of individual meetings with them, and we are continuing to do so."

One of the worse ways to go. Poor lass.

[Seitsuki]

Holy crap. There really are all sorts of people in the world.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Seitsuki

Holy crap. There really are all sorts of people in the world.

The last time I saw the world, it was a crazy place. I don't think anything changed in the past 2 years I was in the army.

But we have worse news....

JAPAN HAS 3.6 MILLION HIKIKOMORIS

Surprise. But aren't they the ones maintaining the export sector of Japan's economy rather than the salarymen?

[Haruka_Kitten]

Originally Posted by Seitsuki

Holy crap. There really are all sorts of people in the world.

The word "depraved" goes somewhere in there

speaking of...

Students swayed by high uni fees

Guess you gotta do what you gotta do.

[Seitsuki]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

The last time I saw the world, it was a crazy place. I don't think anything changed in the past 2 years I was in the army.

But we have worse news....

JAPAN HAS 3.6 MILLION HIKIKOMORIS

Surprise. But aren't they the ones maintaining the export sector of Japan's economy rather than the salarymen?

NO YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND!! Think of it socially: this is why the birth rate is so low! Everyone's stuck on computers watching youtube and playing eroge! It all suddenly makes sense!!!

@Haru:
there you go..

[Haruka_Kitten]

Originally Posted by Seitsuki

NO YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND!! Think of it socially: this is why the birth rate is so low! Everyone's stuck on computers watching youtube and playing eroge! It all suddenly makes sense!!!

And that's a good thing?

Originally Posted by Seitsuki

@Haru:
there you go..

I'm sorry, I'm hoping I won't resort to such measures. I'd be no good at it, and would probably get bored of it.

[Woopzilla]

Connecticut power plant blast 'causes mass casualties'

A huge explosion has rocked a power plant in the US state of Connecticut, with US media reporting at least two people killed and many more injured.

Black smoke could be seen pouring out of the plant site shortly afterwards.

A receptionist at nearby Middlesex Hospital told local media it was receiving victims from the explosion.

The Middletown Press newspaper said a gas pipeline had exploded at about 1130 (1630 GMT).

One local resident said the shockwave felt like an earthquake.

[...]

Connecticut State Representative Matthew Lesser, who lives about the mile from the plant, told the BBC: "Our windows rattled, friends who live closer to the blast site report significant damage to houses."

He added: "I sit on the energy committee and we've been following the construction of this company," he said.

"As I understand it, they were testing a gas line when the explosion took place but we're not sure. Our first priority is making sure that everyone there is safe."

Hundreds of people are believed to have been working at the plant, located on the Connecticut river to the south of Middletown, at the time of the explosion.

Damn, this is pretty bad. Let's just hope the death count remains at two.

[MrTerrorist]

In Paris, the customer is not always right
My God, what a bunch of Jerks the Parisian are. If i ever go to Europe, London is where i'm going, at least the British are friendly.