Where is the US economy headed?

But in okie's weasel world that isn't the same thing if he would have said it.

How are judges supposed to rule on issues involving contemporary technology?

And what do you do about technology that did not exist in the 18th C? How are judges supposed to rule on issues involving contemporary technology?

The Constitution was written more than 2 centuries ago in an agricultural society. That is the crux to what is wrong with strict constructionism.

I in no way said nor would I ever say that judges are prohibited from "rationally (what could you possibly mean by rationally??)" ruling on issues involving contemporary technology.

I orininally asked plainoldme: What do you perceive about the current Constitutional rule of law that prohibits judges from rationally ruling on issues involving contemporary technology?

Plainoldme previously seemed to me to claim our Constituion was no longer valid for permitting judges to rationally and/or logically rule on issues involving contemporary technology.

ALTERNATE RESTATEMENTS OF MY QUESTION (take your pick)

What changes to the Constitution do you think will aid judges to correctly rule on issues involving contemporary technology?

What new rules do you think will aid judges to correctly rule on issues involving contemporary technology?

What new principles do you think judges should apply to correctly rule on issues involving contemporary technology?

What is it in the present contents of the Constiotution that if followed would prohibit judges from correctly ruling on issues involving contemporary technology?

Whether you think it was suggesting something or not (Its simply a matter of opinion, I think it was suggestive), it was still something that pom should apologize for.

It was rude, uncalled for, and puts a lie to her claim about not insulting anyone that didnt insult her.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/stimulus_snake_oil_RySPWcspAZ79U9cskrpHUK

Comment'Stimulus' Snake Oil
Why Dems' Rx only makes things worse
By ALAN REYNOLDS

Last Updated: 5:48 AM, September 7, 2010

Posted: 4:21 AM, September 7, 2010

...

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/stimulus_snake_oil_RySPWcspAZ79U9cskrpHUK#ixzz0zRUYVrNh

A year after the US economy stopped falling, we are still mired in "the worst labor-market crisis since the Great Depression," writes Laura Tyson in The New York Times. Voicing the consensus of the left-liberal economic establishment -- she's reportedly a leading candidate to head up President Obama's Council of Economic Advisers -- Tyson argues that the US unemployment rate, still stuck at 9.6 percent, is reason to try "a second fiscal stimulus" to raise "aggregate demand." She's wrong in a number of illuminating ways.

First, the highest unemployment rates are highly concentrated in relatively few states -- largely the ones with the highest home-foreclosure rates. That suggests that the root problems are localized, lingering debt woes -- so a nationwide quick fix designed to entice people to borrow more and save less is doubly off-base.

Tyson: Top candidate to lead O's economic council presents silly case for deeper deficits.
Two-thirds of the states have jobless rates lower than the national average, which is an amalgamation of 3.6 percent unemployment in North Dakota and 13.1 percent in Michigan.

For most of America, this has not been the worst postwar labor-market crisis. True, the unemployment rate did reach a postwar high this year in three states hit hardest by the boom-bust cycle in housing -- California, Nevada and Florida. Unemployment also hit postwar peaks in Georgia, North and South Carolina and Rhode Island in 2010 and in Kansas last year. For all other 42 states, however, unemployment reached higher peaks during the recessions of 1976 or 1982.

Tyson's second problem: This stubbornly high unemployment is not simply the result of sluggish growth.

Industrial production has been rising steadily for 13 months -- the same 13 months in which the unemployment rate has been above 9 percent. Manufacturing, consumption and business investment have all been recovering -- yet the unemployment rate has been higher than it was when the whole economy was collapsing.

The president's Council of Economic Advisers agrees that unemployment is about "1.7 percentage points higher than would have been expected given the behavior of real GDP." But the reason is clear: The US has for the first time extended jobless benefits beyond one year, to nearly two.

In "The Stimulus for Unemployment" on this page last November, I explained how extended jobless benefits have had the predictable effect of raising the duration and rate of unemployment. Citing academic studies, some by economists in the Obama administration, I estimated that extending benefits to 99 weeks had raised the unemployment rate by about two points. (The CEA's 1.7 percentage point estimate invokes the same math, but without explanation.)

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/stimulus_snake_oil_RySPWcspAZ79U9cskrpHUK#ixzz0zRUNTI16

parados wrote:

But in okie's weasel world that isn't the same thing if he would have said it.

Thats a lie and you know it. I would not consider ever saying anything like what pom said about the Arizona governor.

Thanks for agreeing that pom should be condemned for clearly going out of bounds. I think only the staunchest of liberals that have thrown out all remnants of decency would defend her.

It seems strange because Obama does not fit the mold of past presidents. Instead of loving this country, he doesn't. He believes alot of people and probably him have gotten a raw deal. He is an angry man, you can hear it in his voice. His wife is an angry woman. He doesn't like the idea that people can succeed and make money here, except for himself of course

The point here is that the guy may in fact have a disorder referred to as NPD or Narcissistic Personality Disorder. This possibility is rearing its ugly head because as he encounters more opposition, the guy is actually becoming more demanding, and angry.

I think the president may have a little "dictator complex

Everytime he opens his mouth, we get nonsense, inconsistencies, half truths, or total lies.

Obama got input from everyone including me.

Austan Goolsbee
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

26th Chairperson of the Council of Economic Advisers


[edit] Early life and education

Goolsbee was born in Waco, Texas,[2] the son of Linda Catherine (née Dean) and Arthur Leon Goolsbee. He was raised primarily in Whittier, California.[3]

He graduated from Milton Academy and received both his B.A. summa cum laude and M.A. in economics from Yale University in 1991 and went on to receive his Ph.D. in economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1995. He was an Alfred P. Sloan Fellow (2000–02) and Fulbright Scholar (2006–07).

At Yale, Goolsbee was a member of the Yale Political Union, the improv comedy troupe Just Add Water, Skull and Bones, and the Yale Debate Association. He and partner David Gray were named the APDA National Debate Team of the Year in 1991. He and partner Dahlia Lithwick were runners up for the award in 1990. As a high school student, Goolsbee won the national championship in extemporaneous speaking in 1987. In 2004, he delivered the commencement address at the Milton Academy.
[edit] Academic and public service

Goolsbee has been a Research Fellow at the American Bar Foundation,[4] Research Associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research in Cambridge, Massachusetts,[5] and a member of the Panel of Economic Advisors to the Congressional Budget Office.[6] He served as Senior Economist to the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI).[7] He has been Barack Obama's economic advisor since Obama's successful U.S. Senate campaign in Illinois. He advised Barack Obama in his 2004 Senate race and was the senior economic advisor to the 2008 Obama presidential campaign.[8][9]

Goolsbee's academic research focuses on the Internet, the new economy, government policy, and taxes. He taught a class on economics and policy in the telecom, media and technology industries. He is known in political circles as a centrist and in academic circles as an empirical economist. He focuses on human activity in natural settings to find economic explanations for how people behave.[10]
[edit] Recognition

Over the years he has been named one of the 100 Global Leaders for Tomorrow by the World Economic Forum in Switzerland, one of the six "Gurus of the Future" by the Financial Times, one of the 40 Under 40 by Crain's Chicago Business, and one of the 30 Under 30 by the Chicago Sun-Times.[11]

Press profiles of him include those done by the New York Times, NPR, George Will,[12] the Financial Times,[13] Reuters TV,[14] the Chicago Tribune,[10] Crain's Chicago Business,[15] Politico,[16] and the Abilene Reporter-News.
[edit] Publications and media appearances

Goolsbee is the former host of the television show History's Business on the History Channel, and he appeared frequently as a surrogate for the Obama presidential campaign and as a leading spokesperson for the administration. His skill on television has been widely noted in the media.[17][18]

He has appeared on comedy news shows. On August 11, 2009[19] and February 1, 2010,[20] Goolsbee appeared as a guest on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. He also appeared in Daily Show segments on November 11, 2009[21] where he was interviewed by Josh Gad about whether the Cash for Clunkers program had ruined demolition derby and on March 17, 2009[22] where he said that executives at AIG deserved the "Nobel prize for evil". Jon Stewart described him as "Eliot Ness meets Milton Friedman". In 2009, he was voted the Funniest Celebrity in Washington. On June 15, 2009, he appeared as a guest on The Colbert Report.

Goolsbee was an award winning journalist before coming into the administration. In April 2006, Goolsbee began writing for the Economic Scene column in the New York Times. This column was later moved to Sundays and renamed the Economic View. Prior to this, he wrote the "Dismal Science" column for Slate.com, for which he won the 2006 Peter Lisagor Award for Exemplary Journalism. He has published scores of papers in various peer-reviewed journals and books.[11]