<i> Many voters use politicians' behavior during an election as a surrogate for their expected performance in office.</i>

That is a good point, John.  But this goes beyond merely attacking opponents.  Voters like to see conviction, for lack of a better word.  An acknoledgement that they know their positions are right.

By constantly running away from liberal or spending a bunch of time saying moderate over and over again they cede the debate to the opponent.  Because right now there is liberal and conservative and when dems distance themselves from the 'liberal' label they are basicly telling voters "my conservative opponent is right, in general"

Although attacks are good, too.  For the life of me I never understood why Kerry didn't take that clip of Bush saying that he "didn't think about Osama much" turn it into an ad and run it over and over again.  Hell, Bush even denied saying it "one of the exagerations", put that in the ad too.   

Posted at November 19, 2005 6:22 PM in response to Topic for Discussion

LLCs and corporations are two different things but both have limited liability in that the owners (shareholders or partners) are not personally responsible for the debts of the corporation/LLC.

The only difference between corporations and LLCs are that LLCs get some tax advantages. 

Posted at November 19, 2005 5:24 PM in response to An Idea Whose Time Should Come

Why is it democratic for the government to interfere with the interests of shareholders who probably greatly outnumber the number of workers?

Two words.  Limited liability.  

Why is it democratic for owners of corporations to walk away from their debts while retaining their wealth?

Yes, yes I understand the benefits of limited liability but the fact remains that owners of corporations are allowed to walk away from their failed businesses without having to pay their debts.  The average worker, thanks to bankruptcy reform, not so much. 

Posted at November 18, 2005 6:46 PM in response to An Idea Whose Time Should Come

"what i read from that is that, if smear work like i think they do, these attacks on Murtha are only going to hurt the bushies."

Indeed, the mere fact that BushCo itself has to invoke the dreaded Michael Moore is telling.  For the last four years they've relied on surrogate to do their dirty work for them.  Now they are unhinged and lashing out in person with the smears that, heretofore, they've kept plausible deniability.   

Posted at November 18, 2005 6:32 PM in response to The Mirage of Immunity

Gene,

I'm having a few prblems here.  First, one of the premises for the benefits of free trade is that it allows companies to exploit greater efficenices by reducing labor, regulatory compliance costs.  The companies will, in time, use the capital saved to fund investments here in the US that will create more jobs and benefit those US workers who lost their jobs.

OK, I understand that theory.  But right now there is no capital shortage.  In fact as far as I can tell from the low intrests rates and high real estate/commody prices there already is a bunch of capital that has nowhere to go.  An increase in the supply of capitial does nothing to help workers unless there is adequate demand for that capital.

So I guess my question is, what sort of measures can the government take to increase demand for capital, rather than the supply?  Savings exemptions, capital gains breaks and other such measures do very little to increase demand for capital. 

Posted at November 8, 2005 3:43 PM in response to Proud To Be Agonizing: A Response To Sirota

This also requires the assumption that there is a shortage of capital right now, something that is far from agreed upon - if anything there is a shortage of demand for capital, hence the low intrest rates.</em>

Posted at November 8, 2005 3:13 PM in response to Humpty-Dumpty Redefinitions, Magical Thinking, and False Trade-offs

You know all these calls for national greatness from a bunch of baby boobers with greatest generation envy really ring hollow.  They are more than happy to send the younger generation to dies just so's they can get their war on. 

As is that wasn't enought, they are more than happy to use debt finance to make sure that these 21 year olds will also pay for their war.

National greatness for thee, tax cuts for me.  No wonder their called the 'me' generation.
 

Posted at September 16, 2005 3:21 PM in response to War for Pride

Not only that it is also axiomatic that Gore/Kerry would have been worse.  Terrorists could nuke 6 cites and about 20% of 'em would still be saying - "imagine how much worse it would have been is Gore/Kerry were president!"

Posted at September 8, 2005 2:31 PM in response to If Only The Czar Knew

Not to mention that Venice and the Hanse pretty much proved Lind wrong about 6 centuries ago.  And don't even get me started on Rome, Alexandria and Athens. 

Cities have been, and always will be, the engines of innovation and business.   

Posted at August 12, 2005 6:44 PM in response to Blue Regions: Economic Engines of Economy