if you need your refund to make your mortgage you are in fark all trouble enough without worrying about who to vote for. something tells me submitter is more of an observer in the economy, rather than a participant.

I'm sure we could shake loose 100 billion out of the budget, Submitter. I hear there is a war going on that was based on a complete farkin' lie, we could start there.

how could anything even be wrong with the economy anyway ? Look at the leadership we've had for years now, I really don't see how there could be any problem.

JoJoTheIdiotMonkeyBoy: I'm sure we could shake loose 100 billion out of the budget, Submitter. I hear there is a war going on that was based on a complete farkin' lie, we could start there.

You mean the war on drugs? Or the war on poverty? Or the war on terror? we've got so many wars going on i'm not sure which one to which you refer.

Weaver95: You mean the war on drugs? Or the war on poverty? Or the war on terror? we've got so many wars going on i'm not sure which one to which you refer.

Aint variety grand?

JoJoTheIdiotMonkeyBoy: Weaver95: You mean the war on drugs? Or the war on poverty? Or the war on terror? we've got so many wars going on i'm not sure which one to which you refer.

Aint variety grand?

You didn't answer my question.

Yeah...it's pretty amazing...Edwards wants us all to "sacrifice" things "for the good of the country"...which really means "subsidize minorities and illegals". I simply say this: I'll sacrifice my precious income if he works for free. Edwards is a farking pandering cockmonkey. Too bad it's his wife with cancer and not him.

Democrat and former North Carolina senator suggests an initial investment of $25 billion for job creation

Because America needs more toll booth workers.

Sillygoth: Yeah...it's pretty amazing...Edwards wants us all to "sacrifice" things "for the good of the country"...which really means "subsidize minorities and illegals". I simply say this: I'll sacrifice my precious income if he works for free. Edwards is a farking pandering cockmonkey. Too bad it's his wife with cancer and not him.

Ohhhhhhhkay, I think we can safely say you're not a fan.

How about we just cut 3.6% off the bloated federal budget to get this 100 billion?

Fecking idiot leaches.

fezziwig: How about we just cut 3.6% off the bloated federal budget to get this 100 billion?

Fecking idiot leaches.

Or, better yet, stop manufacturing jobs from draining out of the country.

Weaver95: Or, better yet, stop manufacturing jobs from draining out of the country.

We don't need a president to do that. Just stop shopping at Wal*Mart.

/because paying $25 for a pair of jeans vs $19 will absolutely farking kill you

Evil Otto: We don't need a president to do that. Just stop shopping at Wal*Mart.

Oh Edwards and the rest know that. But nobody is gonna say it in public. They're too dependant on pac donations from wall street corporations to point out that corporations have zero loyality to any nation, least of all ours.

Rand called such people 'looters' and considered them no better than parasites.

Weaver95: fezziwig: How about we just cut 3.6% off the bloated federal budget to get this 100 billion?

Fecking idiot leaches.

Or, better yet, stop manufacturing jobs from draining out of the country.

I'd be happy if they just enforced free (or better yet fair) trade agreements. Right now china has free and unrestricted access to our markets. Our access to theirs? Not so much.

If he keeps saying sh*t like that he's going to get elected. No wonder the Republicans are scared to death of him. OK, so they're scared to death of everything, the party of pervasive fear and cringing cowardice.

Mmmmmmm, government. Yo Libs, we just can't have enough can we?

fezziwig: I'd be happy if they just enforced free (or better yet fair) trade agreements. Right now china has free and unrestricted access to our markets. Our access to theirs? Not so much.

They aren't the only ones.

Lots of foreign governments/organizations have a lot of influence on our election cycles.

flaEsq: No wonder the Republicans are scared to death of him

i assure, no one is scared of candidate john edwards. he's just a dumber biden with better hair

flaEsq: If he keeps saying sh*t like that he's going to get elected. No wonder the Republicans are scared to death of him. OK, so they're scared to death of everything, the party of pervasive fear and cringing cowardice.

I live within my means, I save for a rainy day and I don't buy things I can't afford. I work hard, I'm good at my job and i'm reasonably compensated for my efforts.

So why should my taxes increase to help those who refuse to help themselves?

So why should my taxes increase to help those who refuse to help themselves?

because the people who are the beneficiaries of the "investments" are the voters he seeks, not people like you, who fund it.

albo: So why should my taxes increase to help those who refuse to help themselves?

because the people who are the beneficiaries of the "investments" are the voters he seeks, not people like you, who fund it.

Didn't this country stage a revolution over something similar....? something something taxation without representin' or something?

I'd rather see my taxes rise to pile more money on those who have helped themselves more than enough already, so I'm going to keep supporting our current version of leadership.

Mordant: I'd rather see my taxes rise to pile more money on those who have helped themselves more than enough already, so I'm going to keep supporting our current version of leadership.

You're doing it wrong.

Sillygoth: Edwards is a farking pandering cockmonkey. Too bad it's his wife with cancer and not him.

Is it safe to assume you represent the Christian Coalition on this subject then?

Guys, the annals of history have proven over and over again that central economic planning maximizes the productivity of society.

I'm from the government, and I'm here to help.

RabbitHeadlights: Guys, the annals of history have proven over and over again that central economic planning maximizes the productivity of society.

Interesting point, but irrelevant to the article and the discussion at hand.

Maybe he can have his hedge funds buddies donate the $100 Billion

Give a Man a fish he'll eat for a day, give a man a job as a fisherman, he'll eat everyday.


I'm starting to notice that as Patriotic as Republicans claim to be. They tend to think more about themselves and their own personal situation rather than the situation of their community and thus the overall well being of America and ALL Americans.

Well, I was shopping with my girlfriend in Chapel Hill today and Edward's daughter came into the same boutique. The owner leaned over to me as I sat on the couch watching my S.O. try on clothes and said, "That's John Edward's daughter; she spends so much money here. She really loves shopping." I said, "I'll bet she does."

Everything in this boutique was ridiculously expensive. Must be nice to be part of the reach elite America.

*rich not reach

Chess90: Maybe he can have his hedge funds buddies donate the $100 Billion

No, that money is tied up in post-Katrina fire sales that bought foreclosed homes out from under the New Orleans' poor. Stop being unreasonable.

RalphDClark: Well, I was shopping with my girlfriend in Chapel Hill today and Edward's daughter came into the same boutique. The owner leaned over to me as I sat on the couch watching my S.O. try on clothes and said, "That's John Edward's daughter; she spends so much money here. She really loves shopping." I said, "I'll bet she does."

Everything in this boutique was ridiculously expensive. Must be nice to be part of the reach elite America.

I'm not entirely sure what you're complaining about. You yourself were shopping in said "ridiculously expensive" botique, are you claiming that you aren't rich?

[Edwards] didn't propose how to pay for the plan, saying it's his first policy proposal where he hasn't come up with a detailed plan for funding.

In other words, it's election-year BS.

I heart wal-mart.

Alien5151: RalphDClark: Well, I was shopping with my girlfriend in Chapel Hill today and Edward's daughter came into the same boutique. The owner leaned over to me as I sat on the couch watching my S.O. try on clothes and said, "That's John Edward's daughter; she spends so much money here. She really loves shopping." I said, "I'll bet she does."

Everything in this boutique was ridiculously expensive. Must be nice to be part of the reach elite America.

I'm not entirely sure what you're complaining about. You yourself were shopping in said "ridiculously expensive" botique, are you claiming that you aren't rich?

Am I trying to take away your money? Am I complaining about what rich people do to poor people? Do I want to change the way we do business in the United States? Do I pretend to care about poor people and then exploit them for money and power?

Any way you slice it, we didn't buy anything. We just window shopped. It happened to be too expensive for us.

RabbitHeadlights: Guys, the annals of history have proven over and over again that central economic planning maximizes the productivity of society.

I'm from the government, and I'm here to help.

Public works projects does not necessarily equal central economic planning. People seem to forget that FDR successfully implemented many programs which may have been borderline socialist.

I think it'd be nice if the american government started spending money to help americans.

/I is Ameriraq. I has money now?

DarnoKonrad: Interesting point, but irrelevant to the article and the discussion at hand.

Actually, it has everything to do with the topic at hand, albeit in tongue-in-cheek form. This is Fark, after all.

RalphDClark: Alien5151: RalphDClark: Well, I was shopping with my girlfriend in Chapel Hill today and Edward's daughter came into the same boutique. The owner leaned over to me as I sat on the couch watching my S.O. try on clothes and said, "That's John Edward's daughter; she spends so much money here. She really loves shopping." I said, "I'll bet she does."

Everything in this boutique was ridiculously expensive. Must be nice to be part of the reach elite America.

I'm not entirely sure what you're complaining about. You yourself were shopping in said "ridiculously expensive" botique, are you claiming that you aren't rich?

Am I trying to take away your money? Am I complaining about what rich people do to poor people? Do I want to change the way we do business in the United States? Do I pretend to care about poor people and then exploit them for money and power?

Any way you slice it, we didn't buy anything. We just window shopped. It happened to be too expensive for us.

No you aren't (though technically Edwards' daughter isn't either =P). I guess I just assumed you had bought something, sorry.

Just out of curiosity, but isn't it normal for businesses and such to invest when they have the money so that they have something to tap into when profits are down?

If it is, then what's the issue with the government doing the samething to try and ease any economic issues that may arise in the not so distant future?

I just don't find his platitudes compelling, Alien5151. He doesn't propose how to pay for the fund, doesn't want property taxes to increase or Medicaid to be cut, wants to bail out those who made poor choices when purchasing homes, and invest in clean energy.

There's no firm proposal how to pay, but boy does he sure hate greedy corporations. You know, the corporations that employ millions of Americans. If their cost of doing business is increased, their innovation, profitability, and paychecks to their employees will decrease.

There's a bit of a populist nod vis-a-vis property taxes and Medicaid. You won't pay for it folks, someone else will!

I'm not without compassion for those who are upside down on their home loans. Losing a home sucks. Creating a moral hazard in the marketplace (which, by they way, would benefit the Bear Stearns of the world just as much) as a bad idea. Here's an opportunity to teach the marketplace about predatory lending, CDOs, agency ratings, and Edwards wants to truncate it, counting on government oversight to detect and solve problems better than millions of self-interested people.

And what's clean energy? Ethanol? Derived from corn? Other technologies are at least a decade down the road. But hey, let's use more of a corn crop for fuel, rather than feeding people, ignoring a domestic subsidy to oil refiners and an import tariff on Brazilian ethanol.

All-in-all, it strikes me as pandering, economic sleight-of-hand (of which parties are guilty). What bothers me the most is that bad ideas have bad consequences, and they typically affect the poor most severely.

RabbitHeadlights:

If their cost of doing business is increased, their innovation, profitability, and paychecks to their employees will decrease.

You realize that this particular line has rarely (I'd say never as I can't think of any examples in particular, but someone is likely to pull in some obscure corporation that was 'hurt' back in 1803 or something equally ridiculous) been shown to be true, yes? Everyone uses this argument against taxes and raising the minimum wage, but the vast majority of the cost on an item is unrelated to those two particular components.

I guess the question, Murkanen, is what's the burden of proof? I'm not trying to be glib here, but short of looking at a failed corporation's ledgers from one tax year to the next, with so many other variables affecting their profitability, it's nearly impossible to determine whether taxes hurt a corporation to the point of failure.

I believe on aggregate, however, that the more government is in the pockets of corporations (believe me, I think Uncle Sam should be to a certain extent), the less productive an economy is where their fewer intrusions. See also: France.

And Alien151, I didn't mean to ignore your FDR point. Do you have a thought as to what public works the US needs in 2007? I'd argue that there aren't many, so what happens when the $100B government funds dry up after creating a product or service the economy doesn't demand on its own? See also: the Toll booth comment.

*were there intrusions*; I can't type.

Edwards is only running in order to make Hillary look good by comparison.

This is just more of him doing his job.

Why is it that so called conservatives are all over Edwards for his wanting to pander to the poor, but say absolutely farking nothing at wasting half a trillion dollars handing KBR, Halliburon, and Blackwater a blank check?

Edwards is pretty farking stupid - I bet all he does all day is look at himself in a mirror and go all gay for himself while he fervently believes in such discredited crap as Keynesian economics

Government rainy day funds do come in handy. I wouldn't be opposed to a candidate that says we have to save up that much money so went the next recession happens, we'll have some extra cash to dip into.

But "investing" that money in the way Edwards described doesn't work.

Weaver95: So why should my taxes increase to help those who refuse to help themselves?

I have a better question. Why should those at the bottom end of the scale subsidize folks like you and me at the top? Justify that and I'll answer your question in a similarly unsatisfying way.

RabbitHeadlights: I just don't find his platitudes compelling, Alien5151. He doesn't propose how to pay for the fund, doesn't want property taxes to increase or Medicaid to be cut, wants to bail out those who made poor choices when purchasing homes, and invest in clean energy.

There's no firm proposal how to pay, but boy does he sure hate greedy corporations. You know, the corporations that employ millions of Americans. If their cost of doing business is increased, their innovation, profitability, and paychecks to their employees will decrease.

There's a bit of a populist nod vis-a-vis property taxes and Medicaid. You won't pay for it folks, someone else will!

I'm not without compassion for those who are upside down on their home loans. Losing a home sucks. Creating a moral hazard in the marketplace (which, by they way, would benefit the Bear Stearns of the world just as much) as a bad idea. Here's an opportunity to teach the marketplace about predatory lending, CDOs, agency ratings, and Edwards wants to truncate it, counting on government oversight to detect and solve problems better than millions of self-interested people.

And what's clean energy? Ethanol? Derived from corn? Other technologies are at least a decade down the road. But hey, let's use more of a corn crop for fuel, rather than feeding people, ignoring a domestic subsidy to oil refiners and an import tariff on Brazilian ethanol.

All-in-all, it strikes me as pandering, economic sleight-of-hand (of which parties are guilty). What bothers me the most is that bad ideas have bad consequences, and they typically affect the poor most severely.

And Alien151, I didn't mean to ignore your FDR point. Do you have a thought as to what public works the US needs in 2007? I'd argue that there aren't many, so what happens when the $100B government funds dry up after creating a product or service the economy doesn't demand on its own? See also: the Toll booth comment.

Well I'm not an Edwards supporter so I can't defend a lot of the specific measures that he's called for, and you're right that much of it does seem like pandering. I guess it's just a positive in my mind that he's bringing this to public attention, whereas other candidates may not seem to be particularly interested in the public good.

On the subject of corporations I think that CEO compensation should be tied to the compensation that all the rest of the employees receive, but that's not something that I've heard anyone consider. I have similar issues with the carbon cap plans proposed: I don't think the credits should be tradeable, but no one who I know of publicly endorses such a plan.

I don't think that creating a safety net for workers who may be adversely impacted by the fallout from the housing market (ie layoffs if we dip into a recession) is such a bad idea though. IMO public works projects don't always need to be things which are necessary, the idea is just to create work of some kind in the event that unemployment gets particularly bad. There are probably plenty of roads that need repaving and whatnot, but you could also employ people to build a monument or something (we still don't have a 9/11 monument...).