John Edwards chosen by Kerry as VP

[richiebaseball]

Originally posted by faithinkarma
My income has increased significantly simply because it comes in Canadian funds...when I first moved here one dollar US cost over 1.60 Canadian. Right now it cost 1.319. So I am way ahead, but not in a way that is good for Americans.

I would say there is certainly evidence that a weaker dollar is most certainly good for the US economy.

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/may2003/nf20030516_1127_db035.htm

"Unlike the bursting of the stock-market bubble, however, the dollar's drop is good news, on the whole, for the U.S. economy. Sure, over the short term, it will raise the cost of imports into the U.S. and act as a temporary tax on consumers (see BW Online, 5/16/03, "A Weak Dollar Hurts Before It Helps"). Rising job worries are already hampering spending: Excluding autos, retail sales dropped an unexpectedly sharp 0.9% in April, according to the Commerce Dept.

GLOBAL GAIN. Still, a rise in import prices will have a silver lining since it helps stave off the risks of deflation. Longer term, the weaker dollar should help put a dent in the trade deficit, which soared 8% in March, to $43.5 billion, the second-highest monthly total ever.

Just as important, the dollar downdraft is already having a salutary effect on profits -- and the stock market -- by raising the overseas earnings of Corporate America. In the last few days alone, a string of companies, from Wal-Mart Stores (WMT ) and Procter & Gamble (PG ) to farm-equipment maker Deere (DE ), have joined the parade of companies reporting sharply higher foreign sales and earnings thanks to dollar-induced gains.

What's more, while the dollar's drop is causing deep pain for European, Japanese, and many other foreign exporters right now, eventually, it could be a net plus for the global economy if America's trading partners respond by cutting interest rates or loosening fiscal policy. Such steps would keep their currencies from rising much more against the dollar while stimulating their domestic growth."

Richard

 

[dennis99ss]

Figure nobody wants to read my ranting, so, I took it out. But, please rant away and bash all you want, from your position of having great knowledge about the judicial system, of which you all have shown such a high extent of familiarity and understanding.

 

[Galahad]

Response Removed.....respecting dennis's wish to remove his post......

 

[Eeyore1954]

Originally posted by dennis99ss
Figure nobody wants to read my ranting, so, I took it out.

Thank you!

 

[Arabella Figg 2003]

to answer your question about judges determining expert credibility -- please go google these words: Daubert, Frye.

you know, maybe I'll save you the trouble:

daubert


maybe you should read Mealy's monthly Daubert report...

 

[KarenC]

Originally posted by faithinkarma
milk and gas prices have gone through the roof.

Not to mention college tuition...yikes! My daughter's tuition went up 14% last year and another 14% this year. This year her tuition will be about $5,000 more than we figured we'd be paying when she first started looking at the school she's going to. The money we invested to pay for her schooling is not keeping pace with these increases.

 

[Galahad]

Originally posted by Arabella Figg 2003
to answer your question about judges determining expert credibility -- please go google these words: Daubert, Frye.

you know, maybe I'll save you the trouble:

daubert


maybe you should read Mealy's monthly Daubert report...

Make's sense. The upshot is whether the expert is in the ballpark, not whether they are actually correct or not. That is a pretty wide swath.

There is an interesting case pending in Florida I think that I read about in the AMA news. A doc that was a hired gun "expert" witness is suing the medical society. Seems that the medical society, with the approval of the courts, reviews the expert testimony in malpractice trials, especially in the cases where there is a judgment against the doc being sued. It seems this "expert" was dead wrong in his analysis but the jury bought it a ruled against the doc being sued. The "expert" is now suing the review board for damaging his reputation. Really perverse if you ask me.

 

[faithinkarma]

Originally posted by KarenC
Not to mention college tuition...yikes! My daughter's tuition went up 14% last year and another 14% this year. This year her tuition will be about $5,000 more than we figured we'd be paying when she first started looking at the school she's going to. The money we invested to pay for her schooling is not keeping pace with these increases.

send her to Canada...an excellent education can be had at a great price. It is more expensive for "foreigners" lol. But a year at the University of Toronto for example, will cost an American about 14 thousand, including housing.

My personal recommendation would be McGill in Montreal. Certainly a school of the highest quality. And it offers the chance to live in a different culture and learn a second language.

Probably too late for your daughter..but hey...spread the word...people need to look into this option.

 

[Galahad]

Originally posted by KarenC
Not to mention college tuition...yikes! My daughter's tuition went up 14% last year and another 14% this year. This year her tuition will be about $5,000 more than we figured we'd be paying when she first started looking at the school she's going to. The money we invested to pay for her schooling is not keeping pace with these increases.

Are you saying it is legitimate to hold the President responsible for that or is it just a general comment?

 

[KarenC]

Originally posted by Galahad
Are you saying it is legitimate to hold the President responsible for that or is it just a general comment?

Well...federal money that goes to the states has been cut under the Bush administration and states obligations re homeland security and no child left behind are increasing. Many states are in financial trouble and many of them are making it up by cutting back funding for higher education. The out-of-state state university that my daughter attends is getting less money in real, not inflation adjusted dollars, from the state than it got 15 years ago.

 

[KarenC]

Originally posted by faithinkarma
send her to Canada...an excellent education can be had at a great price.

Several of this year's graduating Seniors from our high school are heading north. Our guidance department has a special program informing parents about the bargains in Canada!

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by wvrevy
Wow....Hey...New game for the republicans....How many times can you say liberal in one sentence ?

This really is getting amusing I've never seen a campaign and it's supporters get so negative so quickly....But no, they ain't a skeered

Yeah...the poll that showed that 65% of the public thought Edwards was a good choice...What do THEY know, anyway ?

I'm confused. Since when is calling someone a liberal going negative?

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by KarenC
Well...federal money that goes to the states has been cut under the Bush administration and states obligations re homeland security and no child left behind are increasing. Many states are in financial trouble and many of them are making it up by cutting back funding for higher education. The out-of-state state university that my daughter attends is getting less money in real, not inflation adjusted dollars, from the state than it got 15 years ago.

Believe what you will, but it's not the federal govt's job to solve the price of tuition at STATE FUNDED UNIVERSITIES or PRIVATE Colleges.

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by peachgirl
Perhaps you'd like to point out a case Edwards filed that was considered frivilous or without merit? Perhaps the doctors and hospitals that are so horribly burdened should direct their anger at those in their profession who are committing malpractice.

The fact is, corporate lawyers are the worst group for excessive litigation. I wonder why Bush and the right aren't going after them?

Read the "junk science" article, then get back to me.

 

[Arabella Figg 2003]

oh, yeah, corporate lawyers -- $500 an hour for writing a 100-page document. and then they have the temerity to cal it a "brief".

 

[suzannen]

Originally posted by dmadman43
Believe what you will, but it's not the federal govt's job to solve the price of tuition at STATE FUNDED UNIVERSITIES or PRIVATE Colleges.

No, but how much money a state is getting from the federal government is a major factor for states determining their budgets. If the amount is decreased, most state funded organizations, like colleges, take budget cuts and the difference usually turns up in things like tuition hikes.

Because of the cuts in the federal budgets to my state (or at least that was the reason we were given by our politicians at the time), over the last 3 years, my state income tax increased, my city income tax increased, the sales tax increased, the cost of my daily commute increased with a major fare hike, an additional 18.25% tax for all commercial buildings (including apartments) was given which all building managements then passed on and charged to all apartment owners. Meanwhile, since my company lost half a billion in assets, for the first time in 20 years - no one got raises. So in answer to the question - are you better off. I'm not. Oh, and the politicians who raised all of these taxes were my republican governor and mayor - which I'm sorry to say actually I voted for.

 

[Galahad]

Originally posted by Arabella Figg 2003
oh, yeah, corporate lawyers -- $500 an hour for writing a 100-page document. and then they have the temerity to cal it a "brief".

LOL!

DW and I saw our attorney a couple of weeks back for an hour to talk about asset protection stuff in the event that someone's baby comes out with brown eyes instead of blue. Got a bill for $200 and all we did was "talk" about it with no changes or other actions needed. It was certainly worth it but I did think there was a bit of irony as I wrote out the check.

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by suzannen
No, but how much money a state is getting from the federal government is a major factor for states determining their budgets. If the amount is decreased, most state funded organizations, like colleges, take budget cuts and the difference usually turns up in things like tuition hikes.

Because of the cuts in the federal budgets to my state (or at least that was the reason we were given by our politicians at the time), over the last 3 years, my state income tax increased, my city income tax increased, the sales tax increased, the cost of my daily commute increased with a major fare hike, an additional 18.25% tax for all commercial buildings (including apartments) was given which all building managements then passed on and charged to all apartment owners. Meanwhile, since my company lost half a billion in assets, for the first time in 20 years - no one got raises. So in answer to the question - are you better off. I'm not. Oh, and the politicians who raised all of these taxes were my republican governor and mayor - which I'm sorry to say actually I voted for.

Since when it is the responsibility of the Federal Govt to give states money? If the States are running out of money, they should cut waste first, then look to raise taxes.

Not sure what business you are in, but I don't Bush or the Administration is responsible for your company losing 1/2 billion dollars in 20 years. Take that up with your Executive management and your Board of Directors. The fact that your STATE governor raised taxes can't be blamed on the federal administration.

 

[Galahad]

Originally posted by suzannen
No, but how much money a state is getting from the federal government is a major factor for states determining their budgets. If the amount is decreased, most state funded organizations, like colleges, take budget cuts and the difference usually turns up in things like tuition hikes.

Because of the cuts in the federal budgets to my state (or at least that was the reason we were given by our politicians at the time), over the last 3 years, my state income tax increased, my city income tax increased, the sales tax increased, the cost of my daily commute increased with a major fare hike, an additional 18.25% tax for all commercial buildings (including apartments) was given which all building managements then passed on and charged to all apartment owners. Meanwhile, since my company lost half a billion in assets, for the first time in 20 years - no one got raises. So in answer to the question - are you better off. I'm not. Oh, and the politicians who raised all of these taxes were my republican governor and mayor - which I'm sorry to say actually I voted for.

I'd be very surprised if there were actual $$ for $$ reductions of money to the states. I would easily believe that the rate of growth of those funds did slow, but it has been slowing since 1994. The bigger problem is that the GOP only got the de-federalization thing only half right. It is right to devolve some things to the states but that doesn't automatically reduce how much it costs to do those things. I'd be satisfied if my tax burden stayed exactly the same but was shifted so that my state got a bigger share of it. But as it is, states didn't have the political will to raise revenue to offset the decentralization.

 

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by Arabella Figg 2003
oh, yeah, corporate lawyers -- $500 an hour for writing a 100-page document. and then they have the temerity to cal it a "brief".

Didn't someone earlier say it's simply "supply and demand"