Gnawfish Blog at Gnawfish.com

Replies: 8 Comments

On Sunday, March 1st, Adam said:
Teaching sounds awesome. What class? You should move down here. Lots of colleges and other employment opportunities. Feel free to use my address as a home base and come down to visit if you like.

Work is good and everything is going well. Little worried about the end of the world given all the present economic news, but we'll see.

On Sunday, March 1st, Mike said:
I'm doing pretty well; thanks for asking. I'm going to be teaching a class here at Yale this summer. If I really enjoy it, I'll start looking for teaching positions sometime next year. Otherwise, I'll need to keep looking for my next scam.

How are you? How's work?

On Saturday, February 28th, Adam said:
I didn't say it was political because we are talking about politicians. I said it was political because the people who are raising the objections are governors who are attempting to make a stand that has little substance and is directed not towards thinking people, but is meant to be a soapbox for shouting down buzzwords into the ears of those with whom would support them in their next and not current job (I only write in run-on sentence forms btw).

I would argue your original point is a red herring. They are not up in arms with the majority of the money, but want to make a showy spectacle of not being a 'tax and spender'. The fact remains that most of these governors are governors of states that get more tax revenue then their state gives out. If any governors should be up in arms, it should be the governors of states like New York or other North Eastern states which subsidize conservative states allowing them to be so 'fiscally responsible'.

But here here. If this is all about not wanting to drive up future unemployment costs, simply let the state accountants know to refuse it. No need to announce it in public address. I'm not sure that was too smart but we'll see.

As far as what the Democratic goals are, be prepared for higher taxes for the wealthy, some kind of health care plan, and military cuts. I'd bet Obama will continue to be moderate though which i'm a fan of. I'm pretty much on board with everything he's done so far (including his "controversial" Iraq decisions).

Anyway, how have you been? Haven't spoken to you in like 15 years.

On Saturday, February 28th, Mike said:
Just because we are talking about politicians that doesn't mean we can simply say "well, its political" and expect to be making a coherent point. Saying its all political has simply allowed you to dodge my original question.

Going back to the beef, the money is not free.

I didn't see Jindal's speech but I do like your pendulum metaphor. It looks like Republicans may have successfully exported democracy to Iraq but they failed to promote fiscal conservatism. What do you think the Democrat goals are?

On Saturday, February 28th, Adam said:
Whoa whoa whoa. This issue is all politics Mike my man. These Republican governors (aka presidential candidates in waiting) are desperately trying to make a name for themselves using the same old conservative taling points. This month, they will be up in arms over federal spending. Next month, it will be over tax increases for the rich. The month after that, it will be social issues (my money is on the gays).

As far as a real beef, i'd have to ask 'Where's the beef?' Don't want some free money, don't take it. Didn't need to go on every single talk show to denounce the money. That's an awful lot of sound a fury for this tale told by an idiot (sorry Bobby Jindal).

Speaking of Jindal, did you see that speech? Creepy. Apparently he's not afraid of volcanoes though. Luckily there aren't any in Louisiana. Didin't see him denouncing andy hurricane related money though.

On Saturday, February 28th, Mike said:
I think whether or not they have an actual beef is the issue. If they do, then it does not follow that they are simply being proud and idealogical. It may be that they are showing a healthy bit of skepticism with regard to the long term consequences of accepting money for short term unemployment expansion.

On Saturday, February 28th, Adam said:
Politically they are on the wrong side. Whether or not they have an actual beef is another issue.

Politics is the art of making the other guy look bad.

On Saturday, February 28th, Mike said:
Although some people call it "stimulus," expanding unemployment does not stimulate the economy. Also, I'm not sure I understand your argument. How do you think states will pay for expanded unemployment benefits when federal money runs out?