Last active
3 years, 5 months ago
  • skuppers66 commented on the diary post Insider Tells Why Obama Chose Not to Prosecute Torture by David Swanson.

    2011-09-04 18:28:14View | Delete

    My take: Obama’s a party aparatchik. No bold ideas; no hope and change; he’s attractive enough, eloquent, and personable. In the minds of the party, “he will do.” He simply wants to promote the power of the party – however that comes about (a re-interpretation of the “no red, no blue america” speech.) The narrative: [...]

  • skuppers66 commented on the diary post Insider Tells Why Obama Chose Not to Prosecute Torture by David Swanson.

    2011-09-04 18:02:43View | Delete

    Keep in mind that Radovan Karadzic was a psychologist; Stalin a seminarian; Franjo Tudjman a history professor. Slobodan Milosivic was a lawyer as was Robbespierre and many on the Committee of Public Safety. Academia promotes one of the worst byzantine cultures, and opportunistic sociopaths abound. Forget all of the hallowed halls shit. Some of the [...]

  • skuppers66 commented on the blog post CBO: Stimulus Supports 2.9 Million Jobs Today

    2011-08-30 16:08:07View | Delete

    no. I’m taking it into account, it’s just that we only have 2 years, so far, of analyzing it. If the whole experiment ended tomorrow, we could say that the results are pretty dismal. What would be worth seeing is a comparison of the results were after 1 year and then the current results. If it yielded 4 million jobs after the first year, but we’re down to 2.9 million now, and by next year, it was down to 1 million net, then it’s a shitty stimulus – which is what I expect we’ll see. Maybe not those numbers, but a continuing decline. Which would tell me that the stimulus wasn’t a stimulus, but a chance for employers to skim off the top (fatten their wallets, take a bonus – whatever).

    Overall, I believe that it could have been done smarter – direct job creation – which really was the point of my original comment. Or maybe just direct subsidies of consumption. Don’t know.

  • skuppers66 commented on the blog post CBO: Stimulus Supports 2.9 Million Jobs Today

    2011-08-30 15:42:25View | Delete

    let me play devil’s advocate on this. When was the stimulus? 2009? The results published are through 2011. So the net effect of the stimulus over 2 years is somwhere between .8-2.9 million jobs. Jobs may have been gained, and others lost, but that’s the net effect. I’d assume that the CBO model takes into account multiplier spending otherwise their model would be crap.

    As well, hasn’t the unemployment rate continued to rise? Up and down, but overall sticking around 9%+ official. Could the stimulus been more effective and larger – I believe so. Should we undertake more stimulus? I believe we should. Just I find it staggering that even with the paltry stimulus, we have even more paltry results for spending 787 billion dollars (even if relatively small, that’s an enormous amount of money).

    About the only part of the stimulus which seems to have given the economy a boost for the amount spent was the cash for clunkers, which was essentially the gov’t giving money directly to the consumer. Maybe we should just start giving folks $50k checks and see what kind of stimulus that brings? (forget about inflationary effects).

  • skuppers66 commented on the blog post CBO: Stimulus Supports 2.9 Million Jobs Today

    2011-08-30 14:38:45View | Delete

    Love it!

  • skuppers66 commented on the blog post CBO: Stimulus Supports 2.9 Million Jobs Today

    2011-08-30 14:37:56View | Delete

    mistating the pay range? Here’s an excercise for you: 1) divide 787 billion dollars by 2.9 million; 2) divide 787 billion dollars by .8 million. What do you get? You get a range of $271,379 and $983,750.
    The point is that 787 billion dollars was spent, and it resulted in AT MOST 2.9 million jobs.

  • skuppers66 commented on the blog post CBO: Stimulus Supports 2.9 Million Jobs Today

    2011-08-30 14:20:12View | Delete

    Good for you, and the ~30 people in your office. Are you each making somewhere between 270k and 1 million? Because no matter how you slice it up, what the CBO is saying is that 700 odd billion dollars was spent, and the end result – whether from direct salary, trickle down, multiplier effect, whatever – between 800k and 2.9 million jobs were created. I have no problem with the idea of government stimulus, it just seems like pretty paltry results for the amount of money spent. Where did all that money go? Did all the unemployed that got jobs out of that, suddenly get vaulted into the top income bracket in the U.S.?

  • skuppers66 commented on the blog post CBO: Stimulus Supports 2.9 Million Jobs Today

    2011-08-30 14:06:54View | Delete

    In the best case scenario it’s $270k/job. But if the stimulus only created .8 million jobs, then it’s nearly $1000000/job. Which is crazy! Can I just have $200k and we’ll call it even Mr. Prez? And that’s why I have a problem with the CBO numbers – somewhere between 800 thou and 2.9 million jobs?? That’s a huge difference, so basically, in my mind, they’re saying that they don’t have a frickin’ clue how many jobs were created.

  • If a neighbor met misfortune, you took care of them.

    And if them coloreds came knocking on his door, you helped him hang ‘em.

  • David, something to keep in mind about TPM. Marshall started it on a suggestion by a friend as something to do to employ himself. He was out of work, and meeting this friend at a local Starbucks in D.C., needed a job and income, and the friend said: “why not start a blog.” No big deal, other than to state that for him, it’s a business venture.

    Obviously I can’t speak for Jane, and I don’t know for certain what her motives were in starting Firedoglake, but I’ve always believed, from both the intensity of her writing and from the very personal dedication she has shown to her causes – as well as the consistent message she has argued regardless of which party is in power – that for her this medium is a way to put forward arguments for the causes about which she is passionate. In other words, Firedoglake is not about paying Jane’s next electricity bill.
    I guess my point is that Marshall envisions himself as starting the next New York Time, and for him it’s about the self gratification and, more importantly, the money. He’s a shill. I stopped reading him after Obama was elected.

  • skuppers66 commented on the blog post Defending Obama with a Failure of Imagination

    2011-08-22 19:15:36View | Delete

    the overall point is that he didn’t NOT want to fuck it up. He was duplicitous. He didn’t want genuine health care reform. He wanted a way to figure out how to get more people paying for health insurance – MAKE them pay for health insurance, and then call it reform. Health reform? He could have called it a Pizza for all it’s worth… why? “because a vest is orange and has no sleeves”

  • skuppers66 commented on the blog post Defending Obama with a Failure of Imagination

    2011-08-22 18:59:25View | Delete

    It all reminds me of the self induced “famine” in the Ukraine in the 30′s: 1)Stalin needed hard currency; 2) he had to solidify his position; 3) he needed state enemies; 4) solution – create a class enemy (kulaks), liquidate them, appropriate their grain, sell it to the foreing markets. Result: 20 million dead. “Soylent Green is People!!”

  • skuppers66 commented on the blog post Defending Obama with a Failure of Imagination

    2011-08-22 18:52:45View | Delete

    The 1%, or the one percenters, or something like that. It’s awesome – he gets tossed out by milton friedman :) Available on Netflix instant.

  • Further to the thought of grabbing congressional seats: try to get a couple of senate seats – ’cause that’s where the power sits. They could spell eachother in filibustering things for 4 years. It would make headline catching stories that both advertise the new party and tell the rest of america that the new party is fighting for them. Maybe support progressive dems, shitbags that they are, and get them to switch to the new party after they win their seats. Suddenly you’d have a progressive caucus that wasn’t tied to the DLC. Simultaneously start up local party offices in as many states as possible – based on the strength and recognition of the seats held in the federal congress, and I think that in time for the 2014 or ’16 elections, you have a party that is a force to be recognized. Ya, sounds simple, but I do think that is the roadmap. How hard is it to win a senate seat? I don’t know. Probably easier and more within our grasp than a presidential seat. And quicker than the 30-odd years it would take to build a movement at the local county and state level; an amount of time that the middle classes don’t have before their total extinction.

  • Absolutely agree with the gist of you post/points. I suppose she could run for the greens or the socialists, but too much perceived baggage with those groups. And this is why we really need to get that 3rd party up and running.

    It seems to me that Jane, Moore, et al are drifting in that direction and I hope they do. Jane’s already shown an amazing ability to organize, so why not take the next step and found the Firedog Party, or whatever. See if Damon, Moore, and any others out there can get folks to give contributions, put together a populist/labor platform, and get someone like Warren to run for senate in the new party. Start with trying to grab seats in the congress, and then move for president in 2016. Because going for president in 2012 would be akin to a moonshot, and in the unlikely event a 3rd pty candidate made it in, he/she would be utterly destroyed by the money parties.

  • It’s what Gorbachev did in the USSR, so there’s precedent. But it’s about as rare as … well something that’s very rare. :)

  • skuppers66 commented on the blog post TMZ: Matt Damon for President, Says Michael Moore on FDL

    2011-08-08 17:40:20View | Delete

    Jane, you’ve shown the way. You’ve started SOMETHING. Keep going. Please! This webinar was fantastic; it started the ball rolling/started the conversation in a real way. I didn’t vote for Obama in ’08 because I could sense what a shit-pisser SOB he really was. My super republican/best friend didn’t vote for McCain either because he could sense what a shit-pisser SOB he really was. And we both looked at each other and said “can’t we have someone else?” I regret not being able to cast a vote – but there was no way in hell that I was going to ‘own’ a vote for Obama. 3rd party is the way – and a serious 3rd party.

    Lay it out; put up a platform that captures the will of the people. But you HAVE to get some congressional seats or a 3rd pty president will be helpless and look helpless.

  • The only way it DOESN’T happen is if we can’t afford it; either because we can’t free up enough of the requisite troops, ships (actually we have the ships), and planes, or because we don’t have enough money to see it through for the first few months – or both.

    It was official policy, under Bush, that we were going to attack Iran. Not HOPE or DESIRE to attack Iran – but that we WERE going to attack Iran.

    There was a conference of government officials given, in very early 2002, in which an administration official told everyone attending, that it was administration policy that we were going to attack Iraq, Iran and North Korea (in that order and mirroring the Axis of Evil speech given a couple of weeks before) and to prepare themselves and their families. And that anyone that didn’t support that policy (the government officials in attendance) needed to find another job. I watched the media circus play out over then next year (are we going to attack Iraq? maybe we can avoid it? weapons inspectors to Iraq! no evidence of wmd! mushroom clouds!), knowing that at the end of the day that it was a foregone decision and we were going in.

    But the thing didn’t play out as planned – they never do – and we got bogged down. So the attack planned for Iran kept getting pushed back, and back, and back. Until Bush was out of time. As well, hand it to the Iranians for surprising us for with their “new found” capabilities every few months, which made us stop and recalculate how much damage they could do to us. They either are more capable than we think or they are the worlds best bull-shit artists. As someone in Iran said “we play chess; the Americans play baseball.”

    So that was Bush. Obama picked up exactly where Bush left off, in regards to Iran policy. Has he plotted a different course in administration policy toward WAR with Iran since taking office? Don’t know, but given how closely he has stuck with the previous administration in almost every aspect of domestic and foreign policy, I wouldn’t bet on it.

  • skuppers66 commented on the blog post Infrastructure Maintenance Alone Could Put Millions to Work

    2011-07-28 13:41:55View | Delete

    “This will not create very many jobs and because of the vast corruption and profits that accompany private, publicly funded infrastructure projects any short-term employment benefits would only result in sharper economic problems down the road plus tax-payers would not get maximum development for the buck.”
    complete nonsense. Aside from the immediately created jobs/tax revenue, investing in roads and rail alone would create new revenue. I can’t tell you how many contracts my customers and I have had to pass up because the infrastructure simply wasn’t there to get the product to market; and I work for a small company. The conversation usually goes like this: “how do we get it to port? Rail? nope, no connections. Truck to rail? Too expensive – need too many overweight permits ’cause the roads are crap. Truck to port? Too much gas and that’s too expensive + the roads are crap, so too many overweight permits needed and that costs too much. Ah well, would have been nice, but fuck it, we’ll source from somewhere else. Lost jobs, lost revenue, lost…. So Infrastructure spending, however inneficient, is a huge multiplier of jobs/revenue.

  • skuppers66 commented on the blog post Worst President Ever, Revisited

    2011-07-09 07:46:13View | Delete

    @ salamder ” It’s not Obama’s fault that he inherited a financial mess. Many countries around the world have had varied responses to the financial crisis and the U.S. is doing better than most of them. ”

    Really? How would you measure that? Have you been abroad lately? Here’s just a couple measures I would use:

    1) GDP Growth; The U.S. ranks 117 in the world according to the IMF

    2) unemployment rates: the u.s. has higher unemployment rates than the major 7 oecd countries such as Italy, Japan, Germany, the U.K. and Canada. I guess France has a level similar to the U.S., but is still lower.,3746,en_2649_37457_47117941_1_1_1_37457,00.html

  • Load More