My Photo
Blog powered by Typepad

April 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30    

« Freedom in 2 years? China debates ‘universal values’ | Main | FDR: Public-sector unions must not be allowed to strike »

October 02, 2010

Comments

Kevin

"Now, how does this affect President Bush’s last deficit? Does he get credit for the $650 billion we didn’t lose?"

I don't think so. His last deficit was $430 billion. It's unlikely that TARP was included in it. Especially since that would mean that Bush balanced the budget and gave us a $220 billion surplus. And as we all know, Bush was a spendaholic that could only be outspent by a democrat.

No, he won't get credit, and he doesn't deserve it anyway. Frickin' prescription drug plan mo#%3 fu#@#$^& son of a b$^#... oops! Sorry, I forgot this is a family blog.

CJW

Let the Obama/Biden administration take credit. Bush is still laughing at all the blame they continue to throw his way.

Kevin

Frank, I'm trying, yet again, to fix the woman with the half-head in your sidebar. I'm attempting to show a 'prequel' version of her getting half of her head blown off by government regulations. I'll put the text in later. First, I'm having trouble making it look realistic. I'm not an artist :(.

Since you call yourself liberal, I assume that you ARE an artist. What am I missing in that image? I could put a bullet in there with some kind of shockwave thing to signify motion, but it didn't work. The blood was already splattered on the wall, making it look poorly thought out and slightly cheesy. Anyway, any ideas would be appreciated.

CJW

Arianna's Moment of Clarity: TARP Bailout Profitability Claim 'Economically' Flawed

Frank Warner

Arianna Huffington is right to worry that any government bailout will just lull big businesses (and reckless members of Congress) into taking excessive risks all over again. We have to make the rules clear.

Of course, one way to avoid big bailouts for private corporations "too big to fail" is to enforce anti-trust laws and break up some of these untouchable monsters. If they're not too big, they're not too big to fail.

In any case, it's refreshing to see that Huffington worries about the unintended bad consequences of subsidizing bad behavior.

The comments to this entry are closed.