Jim

You mean personal attacks and erratic hand waving aren't enough of a response to your questions, thoughts or suggestions? You want meaningful discourse? LOL Good luck with that Jim. It's going to be a long road back for Greece, which is why we need to get our financial house in order now, and not wait until it's so very painful. Back to work for me. But I'm always up for being entertained. And yes, a long row to hoe for Greece. And I agree, we need to make structual changes back here as well.

We seem to get to this point relatively quickly. Again and again. You brougt up the idea of more heavily taxing the 200 richest in Greece. I suggested a tonge-in-cheek one-off tax. So I asked what exactly was your approach to what you offered - now we're off to you asking about my 401k(?). So, what exactly are you proposing? Just looking for some details because it's not clear to me.

Ok then. Your version is.....? do I have a few days to put my expert report together or will soundbites suffice? Kind of interesting how "government spending is responsible for budget shortfall" doesn't elicit as much as a pip of questioning from you but "elites don't pay their fair share" is somehow a big point of contention. Handwaving will suffice as usual. Other than maybe Angela Markel, economists saw Greece heading for the iceberg long before the Wizards of Wall Street pulled off their inside job. The level of debt just wasn't sustainable even in the good times - oh yea - good book-keeping goes a long way. When the government changed hands in 2009 the debt went from 8% to 12% overnight! Hate that!! You offered the 200 taxpayers up - just asking for the details on how you see this playing out - waiting for the details as usual.

Might me more stable, eh?

Ok then. Your version is.....?

Well - at the end of the day consumption can exceed production only as long as there's a store of real wealth somewhere that can cover the difference - so it doesn't really matter if you're wasting money building pyramids or paying 3x as much as necessary for basic municipal services. The ride may be a bit different, but in the end you'll be swirling down the same drain. you'd first have to demonstrate there isn't a store of wealth sufficient to pay for services. 200 individuals own more than the remaining of Greeks yet they pay little to no taxes. Again, there are at least 2 components to a budget: spending AND revenue. OK, let me see here. Using the conservative debt level of $300B divided by 200 individuals equals a mere tax burder per person of $1.5B. Problem solved!

Holy cow. I'll take the horse any day. How the heck are they going to make payments on those bonds with those rates? Yikes. Pretty big hole to dig out of. We may need to tweak our rates soon but this is pretty crazy.

at least if they're all hopped up on oxycodone they won't have an appetite for big macs? Amazing how many heath crises can be packed into one thread!!

Can you say Guilded Age II. Comments from Moyers in a recent speech. Yet the isolation continues – and is celebrated. When Howard came down to New York last December for what would be my last interview with him, I showed him this document published in the spring of 2005 by the Wall Street giant Citigroup, setting forth an “Equity Strategy” under the title (I’m not making this up) “Revisiting Plutonomy: The Rich Getting Richer.” Now, most people know what plutocracy is: the rule of the rich, political power controlled by the wealthy. Plutocracy is not an American word and wasn’t meant to become an American phenomenon – some of our founders deplored what they called “the veneration of wealth.” But plutocracy is here, and a pumped up Citigroup even boasted of coining a variation on the word— “plutonomy”, which describes an economic system where the privileged few make sure the rich get richer and that government helps them do it. Five years ago Citigroup decided the time had come to “bang the drum on plutonomy.” And bang they did. Here are some excerpts from the document “Revisiting Plutonomy;” “Asset booms, a rising profit share and favorable treatment by market-friendly governments have allowed the rich to prosper… [and] take an increasing share of income and wealth over the last 20 years.” “…the top 10%, particularly the top 1% of the United States – the plutonomists in our parlance – have benefitted disproportionately from the recent productivity surged in the US… [and] from globalization and the productivity boom, at the relative expense of labor.” “… [and they] are likely to get even wealthier in the coming years. Because the dynamics of plutonomy are still intact.” Worth a read: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/03/27/960695/-Revisiting-Bill-Moyers-Welcome-to-the-Plutocracy!-speech-

Similarly: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/03/opinion/03krugman.html?_r=1&ref=columnists

No - wish we were. Been 18 yrs since I've been on that route.

Nice. Saturday at Icicle - been a while since I've been on cracks, man I need help. Busy day out there - saw one winger and one grounder at Clamshell, luckly only from 10ft up. Did catch a 4 ft gopher snake. And beer and a Brat afterwards. Yes, gardening for me too on Sunday.

It's technical. You wouldn't understand.

If you're not outraged you're not paying attention. Dammit!

:tup:

You do know I am a scientist. Right? I'm resigning from SCB and NAS.

Not a bad place. Close to Adirondacks and to Gunks!!! Study hard but find time to explore.

your asking the question is revealing of your undemocratic ideology. I didn't know milk was one of the pillars of democracy until now.

Family in town over the weekend and the first time I go to a game in 7 years and they get pounded by the Yanks. Amazing that just tweaking over .500 and there is talk of playoffs. That is a nice stadium though.

from the wayback machine on page 2 - 68$/week for a family of 12 - you think none of these items or the american equivalent are beyond being obtained by the vast majority of americans, poor or not? If you pulled your head out of your ass and actually read any of the literature around food security in American urban and rurban areas, you'd know that fresh, healthy alternatives to shit fast food and convenience store foods are not easily obtainable in communities that are suffering disproportionately from obesity and other diet related illnesses. Rural areas, no. Always been that way. Grow your own like yo pappy did, fuckerz! The Rich have the same problem in rural areas, BTW...unless they can afford to take the chopper to the Big City Whole Foods... In the city, tho? Bullshit. Good, whole foods available cheap and close by in ANY urban neighborhood in the US. Having lived in a few big cities - D.C., NYC, and in some out-of-the-way rural areas, I'd have to agree on the better availability of food items in cities, even in most poor neighborhoods - I know - I lived there! Yea - there's always some small proportion of cities where mahem rules and there is a lack of stores in the immediate neighborhoods. But I've always been able to find decent food by foot, bike, or bus in the city. Not so in the rural areas but then again always had big gardens and swaps with neighbors. Yea - we need some help in food policy. But even with the best I guarantee we would be the porkers of the world. Start charging more for health insurance, seats for airplanes, etc. I like the mix of market and government solutions.

Speaking of drilling - here's a new road that is a pet project of the Alaska Govenor in the Petroleum Reserve. http://foothillsroad.alaska.gov/study_area.shtml

The usual reason for screwed up policies. Getting and staying elected to Congress.

Mixed on this one. The corn subsidy certainly makes high frutose corn syrup and cows pretty cheap - thus a good source of cheap, crummy calories. On the other hand, what? Someone is forcing you to stuff this stuff down your pie hole and watch Housewives of NJ on the couch? Don't think so. Even if QFC looked like PCC (without Birkenstocks) we would still have folks waddling around and waving their arms too much.

As usual, quickly getting to the heart of the issue!!