we own family business and pay very competitive market wages ( as well as crazy business and family taxes)
Julia, with all due respect, and I do respect you, personally. If I am not mistaking, your family business was formed due to contracts from large institutions, with some of your professional connections. (I recall reading this a while back).
There is a huge difference between receiving a contract and fulfilling it, and a competitive day-to-day operations of a small, wild-roaming business that needs to get a capricious customer to spend his/hers own honestly earned money.

Julia, and if you pay high taxes - business and family - it just proves once again that when the politicians want to start taxing the rich and the corporations to pay for all the good, well-intentioned things, you and I and other not that rich but working people end up paying the higher taxes.. the rich and the corporations will find ways to avoid it.. it's just the way it is..there is nothing anyone can do about it unless they want to completely destroy the business sector in this country..just like when the AMT was instituted, it was intented to target the wealthiest in the country, but now millions of working people pay it (and every year that number goes up) because the politicians got addicted to the money and don't want to adjust it since they'll lose billions of dollars.. it just proves that it's better for the government not to grow and spend, but limit their spendings and let people live, start businesses, create jobs and it will actually help a lot of them..

There is a huge difference between receiving a contract and fulfillingit, and a competitive day-to-day operations of a small, wild-roamingbusiness that needs to get a capricious customer to spend his/hers own honestly earned money.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
what about not so honestly earned money? :-)

so then you of all people should have been supportive of thestimulus package which allowed many of your capricious customers keeptheir jobs and continue spending their "honestly earned" money at yourplace of business.

furthermore, it seems like you almost begrudge Julia her"connections"... I find this especially ironic because you yourself(and many others here) continuously write about the equal opportunitiesand the fairness of the free market... using your own argument, what's preventing you from establishing the same professional connections and forming a similar business?

Lina, do your hands get twisted when you type?
I don't know where you live, work and which human connections you keep, but one needs to live in a bunker 1,000 foot deep in the core of the earth to think that there are real people who benefited from Spendulus and have more spending money now, comparing to 2 years ago.

Должен извиниться перед Юлией Стайн, когда то давно я прочитал о её семейном бизнесе и сделал вывод что её профессия в комбинации с медицинским профилем их бизнеса должны быть связаны. Подтверждение старой американской фразы, "never ASSUME anything". I assumed and made an ass out of myself.

I live in the tri state area, have pretty much always worked in the financial sector, therefore I know of what I speak... that's why I can confidently say that I'm pretty sure that the people who got to keep their jobs benefited as didthe businesses that continued receiving their disposable income. maybe it's you who needs to get out into the real world every now and then. :)

I actually meant to say corporate bailout instead of the stimulus package (which is not without its merits) - if that makes any difference

Corporate bailouts is a form of statism. Just like in fashist Italy, itsn't it? Just think about it. Obama is all about crony capitalism.

I love this quote by Thomas Sowell:

Liberalism is totalitarianism with a human face.

the government will end up making money from the "bail out".. they actually already making money from it.. i think AIG and GM are the only 2major companies that have not paid back.
stimulus was just a huge load of pork :(

even if the government is making money from the bailouts still doesn't it right.. and the way they did it - picking winners and losers, bailing out their "cronies", forcing others to accept the bailout, etc..doesn't look like a government of a free democratic country to me..

yes, the complete collapse of our financial institutions would have been preferable

"they actually already making money from it.. i think AIG and GM are the only 2major companies that have not paid back."
Mike, you're correct. Banks are making tons of money. You know how? By buying 10-year treasury bills at 3% interest and no risk because the FED lowered prime rate to 0%.
You know who these banks are making money on? You, me and millions of Americans (many of whom are senior citizens living on fixed income) - and whose money can't even keep up with the rate of inflation because they are getting 0% return from the banks.
So the banks turn over hundreds of billions of $$$ to the Federal government for a promissory note, and the government turns around and spends that money on buying favor with special interests and buying their votes.

This is the real "wealth redistribution" - on a massive scale.

"and whose money can't even keep up with the rate of inflation because they are getting 0% return from the banks."
- well, nobody ever said banks are investment institutions. Want money to grow- keep 6mo expenses in the bank, invest the rest.
At least into Govt bonds, those are safe. Any "senior" even without any knowledge of it can get free investment advice at their Senior Center or at those free seminars in town.

Julia,
You're missing the point. It's not about advising seniors and others how best to invest their money. And by the way, government obligations are "safe" ONLY if held to maturity. For a senior citizen to by 10-year treasury bill now would mean he will get his money back ONLY in 10 years. Sold in interim in the secondary market, this investment will likely lose money if interest rates go up - and they ARE going up because there is no room to go down!
The point I was making is that what the government is doing now - transferring billions from savers to the banks via currency and interest rate manipulation is nothing more than "wealth redistribution" on a massive scale which dwarfs any "stimulus" of which there already have been several.

Lawmaker Seeks Investigation Into ShoreBank Bailout
The Bachus investigation could pose problems not just for the White House, but also the firm involved in the bailout, among the most prominent is Goldman Sachs (GS). As reported by FOX Business, Goldman and several large banks have agreed to pitch in about $140 million, which when combined with probable federal aid, would prevent the FDIC from taking over the troubled lender.
But people at the big banks say they received what they described as political pressure to make the contributions; Shorebank is based in Chicago, President Obama's hometown, and has been singled out by the president for praise because of its lending activities in poor communities. In addition, President Obama's senior adviser, Valerie Jarrett, has served on a Chicago civic organization with a Shorebank director.

For a senior citizen to by 10-year treasury bill now would mean he will get his money back ONLY in 10 years.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treasury bills are short-term government securities with maturities ranging from a few days to 52 weeks. Bills are sold at a discount from their face value.
Treasury notes are government securities that are issued with maturities of 2, 3, 5, 7, and 10 years and pay interest every six months.

Surprise, surprise - Obama and co. are corrupt! (ch)
----------------------------------------------------------------
innocent until proven guilty

"In a letter to President Obama, Bachus writes: “In a year in which hundreds of banks are expected to fail, it is good news that this troubled institution has managed to survive. The question that many are asking, however, is why did government-supported Wall Street banks decide to save ShoreBank rather than the numerous others that faced a capital shortage?”
Some of the nation’s largest banks including Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, JP Morgan and Bank of America, have agreed to pitch in about $140 million, which when combined with $75 million in federal aid, would prevent the FDIC from taking over the undercapitalized community lender known for its strong ties to Washington."

Doesn't this pretty much answer his question? So far, I see no evidence of corruption - just business as usual.

lol, the only bank to be bailed out by "big banks" is the bank with strong ties to Obama..
and executives of big banks claim it's because of strong pressure from the White House..
I would say it's a smoking gun if i ever saw one.

I think it's more a case of, I'll scratch your back if you'll scratchmine. How is this different from removing limitations of corporate andunion contributions to political campaigns? You honestly believenothing is expected in return? The only difference is, in this case itwas a loan (rather than a gift) made to another business entity, ratherthan a direct donation to a specific candidate.

It's interesting how Republicans remained surprisingly quiet when no bid contracts were awarded to Halliburton. Does Obama own any shares in ShoreBank? *-)

who owned shares of HAL?
-
Cheney was HAL CEO? for along time.
There is this whole HAL timeline....
here is a little something:
***********.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/09/26/politics/main575356.shtml

I think all administrations are in bed with industries.... no different - Reps, Dems... they all are puppets of those who pay them...not to sound too cynical. Our lobbying system led to this. Country is ruled by industry interests, we saw it during recent healthcare debate - nobody could do anything.

just reading recently a lot about food industry history.....oh,my, oh,my. Just take Monsanto/ Rumsfield/ aspartame story. Disgusting, dirty...There is so much info on it. Just read Pollan or Marion Nestle.

********97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=11068
the truth is that Halliburton has always received no-bid contracts during Clinton and the war in Bosnia too.. because no one can do this kind of work on that scale, no company..
but Obama??!! did we vote for change?? and we got the most corrupt Chicago machine politician.. reminds me of Blagojevich when he as a governor awarded grants to a local hospital and demanded 50K to his campaign..I guess this is common practice in Chicago..
for a president put pressure on private businesses to give money to another private business (whichhas strong connection to his people).. unheard of..

Занятная статья в Chicago Tribune о том, какими методами Президент Линкольн выиграл номинацию от Демократической Партии
"Lincoln supporters poured into the city, courtesy of special cheap rail fares engineered by Lincoln's men. No tickets to the convention? No problem. Counterfeit convention tickets were printed on local presses — history doesn't record whose (but we can guess) — and handed out to Lincoln boosters."
***********.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-edit-lincoln-20100514,0,1136086.story?page=1
За 150 лет в чикагской политике немногое изменилось :-D :-D

Chaney had no interest in HAL once he became a VP..
HAL as well as 100s of other contractors received bidded as well as no-bid contracts for at least 50 years..
The only reason Chaney and HAL were singled out is because he happened to be a CEO of that company before.
In fact once he became a VP he converted all his accounts into blind trusts ( which is very common ).
The interesting story about this particular bank is that it was singled out by Obama before for lending to "underprivileged".. what a successful business model, huh?
And later that was the only small bank to be "saved" instead of taken over by FDIC.
***********.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/banklist.html <-- a list of banks that were NOT saved.

September 25, 2003

WASHINGTON (CNN) - A congressional report concludes that, under federal ethics standards, Vice President Dick Cheney still has a financial interest in Halliburton, the energy services company he used to run.


The report says that the deferred compensation that Cheney receives from Halliburton as well as the more than 433,000 stock options he possesses "is considered among the 'ties' retained in or 'linkages to former employers' that may 'represent a continuing financial interest' in those employers which makes them potential conflicts of interest."

On Sept. 14, Cheney said on the NBC News program "Meet the Press" that"Since I left Halliburton to become George Bush's vice president, I'vesevered all my ties with the company, gotten rid of all my financialinterest. I have no financial interest in Halliburton of any kind andhaven't had, now, for over three years."

here it is...I found it.
***********.halliburtonwatch.org/about_hal/chronology.html
Pretty interesting.
Maybe he had no "interest" by some parameters....but he strikes me as someone who becomes obsesses and wouldn't let go ,in general......but, again, it's just an observation.
What I'm saying - ALL politicians have involvement do various degrees....some are more corrupt then others.

"ShoreBank is the oldest and largest community development bank, founded and headquartered in Chicago. It had $2.6 billion in assets as of 2008.

Although mission-based, the bank's financial performance has historically matched or exceeded that of its peer banks.

Former President and Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton is a prominent supporter of the bank. In 1985, ShoreBank worked closely with Clinton to set up the Southern Development Bancorporation, a community development bank serving rural Arkansans. Clinton described ShoreBank as "the most important bank in America" and credited ShoreBank’s success with inspiring a movement of community development financial institutions

Under a grant from the Ford Foundation in the 1980s, ShoreBank worked with Muhammad Yunus to help him incorporate Grameen Bank in Bangladesh. "


Obviously, it's not just "some small bank".

lol, oh yeah.. it worked with Muhammad .. yep.. the bank is clearly important...

Занятная статья в Chicago Tribune о том, какими методами Президент Линкольн выиграл номинацию от Демократической Партии
Линкольн был кандидатом от Республиканской партии.:-)
His main political objective was to abolish slavery. *Democrat party at the time wanted to keep the slavery.

"Линкольн был кандидатом от Республиканской партии"
Заметил, после того как написал.
Но чикагские методы от этого не меняются :-D

Теперь-то мы уже все очень хорошо знакомы с Чикагскими методами. *Но у людей память короткая...(tr)

Did you see the rat, which completely ignored the President?

Smelling garbage in the White House anyone?


Cheers...(D) (D) (D)

Rep. Joe Sestak, winner of the Pennsylvania Democratic Senate primary, is refusing to provide more information on what job he was offered by a White House official to drop of that race, although he confirmed again that the incident occurred.
The White House was backing incumbent Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) in the primary. Sestak acknowledged in an interview in February that he was offered a position by an unnamed White House official - a potential violation of federal law - but has not offered any specifics on conversation. Republicans are trying to use the issue against Sestak in the November Senate race.
"It's interesting. I was asked a question about something that happened months earlier, and I felt that I should answer it honestly, and that's all I had to say about it." Sestak said Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press." "Anybody else has to decide on what they will say upon their role. That's their responsibility."

Yet Sestak confirmed to NBC's David Gregory that the incident did take place.
"I was offered a job, and I answered that," Sestak said. "Anything that goes beyond that is for others to talk about."

********tinyurl.com/295qq4x

So, now the story gets really sleazy because the impeached president got involved.
Now Sestak does not look too good. Will be a lot easier to run against him after this scandal.