Waiting for Fitzgerald

[SlaveNoMore]

This idea makes a lot of sense to me:

Kelo was a bad decision, (articles here and here). But let's USE IT anyhow - (while we can; before the most effected states (LA & MISS) pass laws banning the practices which Kelo allows: chiefly, the seizure of private land by the state in order to give it to a private developer whose redevelopment of said land will have public benefit).

Vast tracts of fouled (and previously BLIGHTED) New Orleans property should be bought by a federal government trust - (overseen by the likes of Paul Volker and Colin Powell and Rudy Giuliani and Tommy Franks and Mario Cuomo and Paul Ueberroth and real estate developers Hovnanian, Trump and Rudin).

Then -- AFTER a master plan is developed, with new state of the art utility, port, and communications infrastructure mapped out and finaced by the commission -- neighborhoods should be put up for competitive bidding by PRIVATE developers.

The private developers would submit master plans of their neighborhood redevelopment - which would have to conform to the federal master plan for the overall city and the neighborhood. And their redevelopment plans would have to conform to historical architectutral standards set up by the commission to protect the CHARACTER of the city.

Private developers redeveloping NEIGHBORHOODS en mass (or at least redeveloping several square blocks at a time) would work faster, cheaper, and bring completed projects to the market sooner than anyone or anything else.

This is a once in a lifetime opportunity for us to redesign and redevelop New Orleans in a way which will leave the mistakes of the past in the past: no more ghetto projects; no more over-crowded poverty-stricken de facto segregated blocks, no more crack-houses.

Let's use Kelo. Let's begin NOW.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
'(UPI) The terrorists saw our response to the hostage crisis in Iran.........the first World Trade Center attack, the killing of American soldiers in Somalia, the destruction of two U.S. embassies in Africa and the attack on the USS Cole,' Bush said. 'The terrorists concluded that we lacked the courage and character to defend ourselves and so they attacked us.'

Right on W!

I have to admit, I was surprised to see Bush criticizing Reagan, his father, and himself like that.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
Find me one that doesn't (and I hate to break it to you, but Reich is not considered a reputable economist except on the blogs you frequent).

Don't worry -- I'll wait

Nice try, but I asked first.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
As Clinton said the most powerful person in the world is the bond market. Clinton sucked up to the bond market when he first got in (making his lament in "All Too Human" that he was an Eisenhauer Republican). The markets gave him the benefit of the doubt, but when he raised taxes and couldn't reign in spending in the "93 deficit reduction act blah blah blah crappity crap crap.

And like *that*, the constitutional responsibility for doing things like raising taxes switches from Congress to the President. Ladies and gentlemen, that is how it's done.

[Ty@50]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Nice try, but I asked first.

does it make anyone feel better if i apologize for this sort of behavior now?

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by Spanky
Actually this is not true. Deficit prediction are almost always to high in a growing economy and too low in a slowing economy because of the multiplier effect. When the economy grows, tax receipts grow at a higher percentage than the economy. One of the reasons is "bracket creep". People get pushed into higher tax brackets where they pay a higher percentage of taxes. There are also many other factors.

If people remember, no one saw how quickly the budget was going to get balanced. Every quarter the deficit was being adjusted down because of unanticipated growth in revenue from the economic growth.

You general statements aappear to me to be all true.

However, they absolutely does not counter either the Captain's specific statements or the numbers he cited which underly his statement. In fact, they seem to be non sequiturs.

Let's roll the tape:

Captain: "Here are the numbers showing that these oranges are larger than in past years. Based on those numbers, it appears that the unusual changes in the weather patterns which affected the growing season may account for this phenomenon."

Spanky: "Actually, this is not true. Oranges are, in fact, orange in color -- unless not fully ripened, in which case they are green. They most commonly originate in Florida. Oranges are also generally roundish.

"BTW -- we do not have the benefits of oranges from other countries due to those damn Democrats who hate free trade."

What did I miss?

S_A_M

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
It amuses me that you will not believe that the projections have been inflated so that this clima can be made. It does not surprise me that you do not acknowledge that this has been pointed out to you before.

Yes - but it was such B.S. I did not think it worthy a resonse. The projections are always off. Unless you think Bush can perfectly predict the future, your accusation is absurd.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Nice try, but I asked first.

Why should I care if you asked first. I am not going to waste my time doing research because you can't face the truth.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
And like *that*, the constitutional responsibility for doing things like raising taxes switches from Congress to the President. Ladies and gentlemen, that is how it's done.

The bond market made the mistake of assuming that since Clinton was the head of the Democrat party, and the party controlled congress, that he could have some influence on the budget.

They were mistaken.

Switch? Are you trying to imply that I am wrong when I keep insisting that the budget is controlled by Congress.

Or do you think it is absurd to assume that if the President and the Congress are of the same party that the president might have some influence on what Congress does.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
You general statements aappear to me to be all true.

However, they absolutely does not counter either the Captain's specific statements or the numbers he cited which underly his statement. In fact, they seem to be non sequiturs.

Let's try and pay attention. Did you miss his statment about differentials? Did you miss his comment where assumed that growth in receipts should equal economic growth? Explain to me how my countering one of the critical assumptions underlying his argument is a non sequitur?

[Spanky]

New Orleans was a poorly planned city. With the destruction of large swaths of the city it would be foolish to rebuild it exactly the way it was before if the cities growth was not well planned out. In a metropolitan area you need to be able to do some redisigning etc. when stuff changes or when past government planned poorly. In a metropolitan area property is an easily priceable commodity. People's attachment to sacrosanc property rights in the city is just unrealistic. As long as there is just compensation, cities needs to be able to move stuff around to make the city liveable for everyone.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Ty@50
does it make anyone feel better if i apologize for this sort of behavior now?

It's a rude shock to discover that I will be just like Hank when I'm 50.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
Yes - but it was such B.S. I did not think it worthy a resonse. The projections are always off. Unless you think Bush can perfectly predict the future, your accusation is absurd.

I don't need to think that Bush's people can predict the future perfectly to think that they are inflating publicly announced initial estimates so that they can later crow that the hellacious deficits they're running up are nonetheless less than the even hellaciously larger deficits previously predicted.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
Why should I care if you asked first. I am not going to waste my time doing research because you can't face the truth.

Oh, good one.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
The bond market made the mistake of assuming that since Clinton was the head of the Democrat party, and the party controlled congress, that he could have some influence on the budget.

They were mistaken.

It's impressive that the entire bond market could get a matter of constitutional law so wrong, especially since you were there to set them straight.