Macaca
07-24 08:04 AM
Reform, the FDR way (http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-shlaes23jul23,1,2603353.story) Democrats are right to revere Roosevelt, but even he knew when to reform his own reforms. By Amity Shlaes, AMITY SHLAES is the author of "The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression," a syndicated columnist for Bloomberg News and a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. July 23, 2007
WHERE'S the fun? That's the feeling you get watching the Democrats in Washington this summer. Gone is the happy plan for a frenzy of lawmaking, the "Hundred Hours" of action Speaker Nancy Pelosi promised when the Democrats took the House. The speaker's artful allusion to Franklin D. Roosevelt's "Hundred Days" quickly became an ironic echo. During that first euphoric legislative period, Roosevelt managed to rescue the banking system from disaster, assist bankrupted farmers, rewrite the economics of agriculture and the rules for flailing businesses, bring back beer � you name it. Contemporary leaders can't even act on pressing issues such as agriculture and immigration, not to mention Social Security.
Why can't politicians be Roosevelts today? For an answer, let's look to the middle of 1935, about two years into FDR's New Deal and the equivalent of about now in the election cycle. The federal government was still smaller than the nation's state and local governments combined. Two out of 10 men were unemployed. FDR took the economic emergency as a powerful mandate for further lawmaking. He jumped into the project with all the glee of a boy leaping into a sandbox. The papers reported that he was going to "blast out of committee" yet another round of bills, and blast he did � that year the country's premier labor law, the Wagner Act, was passed, as was Social Security.
At about the same time, Roosevelt slapped together the Rural Electrification Administration, which came on top of the New Deal's large farm subsidies. For construction workers, artists and writers, he created � also in mid-1935 � the Works Progress Administration, which hired the unemployed, including artists, craftsmen and journalists. To appreciate the size of that gift, imagine a contemporary politician responding to a market crash by putting ex-employees of Google on the federal payroll. The president also built on to an already large structure, the Public Works Administration, which funded town halls, grammar schools and swimming pools in 3,000 counties. The money? Roosevelt passed a tax increase that opponents called the "soak the rich" act. It contained an estate tax rate hike that would make John Edwards drool. By 1936, the government took up more than 9% of gross domestic product. For the first peacetime year in U.S. history, Washington had edged past the state and local governments in size to become a larger part of the national economy. (Just a few years earlier, state and local governments had been twice as large as Washington.) FDR had reversed the old crucial ratio of federalism, and Washington has dominated the country ever since.
Those early commitments set a trend of promises. Some of them became what we now call entitlements. Lyndon Johnson in the 1960s layered on governmental commitments with the Great Society. President Bush has heaped on more, with a new entitlement: prescription drugs for seniors. Only a narrow part of the federal budget remains for discretionary spending � the part left over for new ideas. And setting aside the question of whether an individual program is good, bad or simply in need of an overhaul, we've found as a country that old commitments are simply too hard to undo.
This is partly because of the way the political game works. When you seek to take away a benefit from one targeted recipient, he will fight like crazy to keep it � think of the ferocious battles the farm lobby wages over even tiny reductions in agricultural subsidies. Those who gain from reducing the size of the handout, however, are members of the lobbyless general public who will receive only an incremental advantage, maybe the equivalent of a penny or two apiece. So the rest of us don't have the incentive or ability to apply countervailing pressure. Yet that's exactly what we need today: the energy and exhilaration of FDR in his first term.
Today's timidity would have disturbed FDR, who had no trouble knocking down the sandcastles he had made. Early in the 1930s, he created 4 million jobs with the Civilian Works Administration, then uncreated them when he decided the CWA was too close to the English dole. When he tired of Harold Ickes' Public Works Administration, he scaled it back, and finally abolished it in 1941. As for Ickes' Department of the Interior, FDR decided that it was time to revise it into "a real Conservation Department" � a change many would welcome today.
A few leaders since FDR have persuaded Congress to help them bring about changes on this scale � Ronald Reagan's bipartisan tax reform of 1986 and Bill Clinton's welfare reform a decade later come to mind. These presidents were truer to FDR's spirit than the hesitating Congress of today. Clearing some blank space for new institutions is possible. But lawmakers won't do it if they honor Rooseveltian edifices more than Roosevelt did himself.
WHERE'S the fun? That's the feeling you get watching the Democrats in Washington this summer. Gone is the happy plan for a frenzy of lawmaking, the "Hundred Hours" of action Speaker Nancy Pelosi promised when the Democrats took the House. The speaker's artful allusion to Franklin D. Roosevelt's "Hundred Days" quickly became an ironic echo. During that first euphoric legislative period, Roosevelt managed to rescue the banking system from disaster, assist bankrupted farmers, rewrite the economics of agriculture and the rules for flailing businesses, bring back beer � you name it. Contemporary leaders can't even act on pressing issues such as agriculture and immigration, not to mention Social Security.
Why can't politicians be Roosevelts today? For an answer, let's look to the middle of 1935, about two years into FDR's New Deal and the equivalent of about now in the election cycle. The federal government was still smaller than the nation's state and local governments combined. Two out of 10 men were unemployed. FDR took the economic emergency as a powerful mandate for further lawmaking. He jumped into the project with all the glee of a boy leaping into a sandbox. The papers reported that he was going to "blast out of committee" yet another round of bills, and blast he did � that year the country's premier labor law, the Wagner Act, was passed, as was Social Security.
At about the same time, Roosevelt slapped together the Rural Electrification Administration, which came on top of the New Deal's large farm subsidies. For construction workers, artists and writers, he created � also in mid-1935 � the Works Progress Administration, which hired the unemployed, including artists, craftsmen and journalists. To appreciate the size of that gift, imagine a contemporary politician responding to a market crash by putting ex-employees of Google on the federal payroll. The president also built on to an already large structure, the Public Works Administration, which funded town halls, grammar schools and swimming pools in 3,000 counties. The money? Roosevelt passed a tax increase that opponents called the "soak the rich" act. It contained an estate tax rate hike that would make John Edwards drool. By 1936, the government took up more than 9% of gross domestic product. For the first peacetime year in U.S. history, Washington had edged past the state and local governments in size to become a larger part of the national economy. (Just a few years earlier, state and local governments had been twice as large as Washington.) FDR had reversed the old crucial ratio of federalism, and Washington has dominated the country ever since.
Those early commitments set a trend of promises. Some of them became what we now call entitlements. Lyndon Johnson in the 1960s layered on governmental commitments with the Great Society. President Bush has heaped on more, with a new entitlement: prescription drugs for seniors. Only a narrow part of the federal budget remains for discretionary spending � the part left over for new ideas. And setting aside the question of whether an individual program is good, bad or simply in need of an overhaul, we've found as a country that old commitments are simply too hard to undo.
This is partly because of the way the political game works. When you seek to take away a benefit from one targeted recipient, he will fight like crazy to keep it � think of the ferocious battles the farm lobby wages over even tiny reductions in agricultural subsidies. Those who gain from reducing the size of the handout, however, are members of the lobbyless general public who will receive only an incremental advantage, maybe the equivalent of a penny or two apiece. So the rest of us don't have the incentive or ability to apply countervailing pressure. Yet that's exactly what we need today: the energy and exhilaration of FDR in his first term.
Today's timidity would have disturbed FDR, who had no trouble knocking down the sandcastles he had made. Early in the 1930s, he created 4 million jobs with the Civilian Works Administration, then uncreated them when he decided the CWA was too close to the English dole. When he tired of Harold Ickes' Public Works Administration, he scaled it back, and finally abolished it in 1941. As for Ickes' Department of the Interior, FDR decided that it was time to revise it into "a real Conservation Department" � a change many would welcome today.
A few leaders since FDR have persuaded Congress to help them bring about changes on this scale � Ronald Reagan's bipartisan tax reform of 1986 and Bill Clinton's welfare reform a decade later come to mind. These presidents were truer to FDR's spirit than the hesitating Congress of today. Clearing some blank space for new institutions is possible. But lawmakers won't do it if they honor Rooseveltian edifices more than Roosevelt did himself.
wallpaper Nicole Kidman coy on aby
grimreaper
01-17 10:35 AM
Just came across GAO's( General Accountability Office) recommendations to make changes in H-1B program. Eventhough they talk mainly about Staffing Companies and increased employer accountability, there seems to be a mention regarding the H1B extensions beyond 6 years with simultaneous application to green card. Eventhough not stating in exact words, it seems to hint to the congress to seriously relook at H-1B extensions beyond 6years and also regarding cap exempt Visas and supposedly how easy it is to get them. Looks like with the economy being how it is, Congress might use this report to jump in and bring some unfavourable changes. Any thoughts on this...?
Here is the link to the report:
http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d1126high.pdf
Here is the link to the report:
http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d1126high.pdf
kirupa
07-25 01:34 AM
Added :)
2011 but Nicole Kidman#39;s bump
iam4u4ever
02-12 05:25 PM
AFAIK you do not need any documents as far as you have an onward connecting flight out of
Dubai. It is very simple. You do not need to worry about anything.
Dubai. It is very simple. You do not need to worry about anything.
more...
21stIcon
07-02 08:03 AM
Your need to present your total asset / liabilities /previous experience in this field or any other successful venture in the past to your long term bank ally
if you have build up equity at home then consider home equity to start business
or apply
Small Business Administration - Financial Assistance (http://www.sba.gov/services/financialassistance/index.html)
if you have build up equity at home then consider home equity to start business
or apply
Small Business Administration - Financial Assistance (http://www.sba.gov/services/financialassistance/index.html)
eucalyptus.mp
03-16 04:12 PM
whats the best option for me ?
Should I go back to india after finishing current project and try next year or afterwords ?
Should I go back to india after finishing current project and try next year or afterwords ?
more...
casinoroyale
07-01 09:34 AM
B1 is purely-non-immigrant-intent visa while H1 is dual-intent. Given this, I do not see any harm entering on B1 while you have a valid I-797 presumably starting Oct 1st? So, after returning you can appear for H1 visa stamp and later enter using H1.
This is my personal opinion, please take attorney's advise.
This is my personal opinion, please take attorney's advise.
2010  Nicole Kidman and
BPforGC
11-30 12:39 AM
There "are" no good "university" that will accept you, unless you get good TOEFL score.
You know what I mean.....
You know what I mean.....
more...
STAmisha
12-26 10:54 AM
I filed my I-485 on july 2, 2007. Now I'm moving to new home. What do I need to do? How do I inform USCIS?
Thanks
Thanks
hair #39;Delighted#39; Nicole Kidman
fcres
07-29 11:11 AM
We filed for our 2nd AP on July 2nd. They received it on 8th and mine was approved on 22nd. Got my AP yesterday. No idea what happened to my spouse's. I got that RN from the back of the check and called USCIS. I entered the 10 digit RN and it said not enough numbers entered?? So i called again and said no RN and i got a cust service rep. I gave her the RN and she said they received it on 8th and is still processing it. She said it doesn't matter whether we filed together and asked us to wait 6 months.
Is this normal? I just hope the other AP is not lost.
Also since there is no expiry date on the AP, is it to be taken as its valid only for 1 year from the date of issue? We never had to use our 1st AP.
Is this normal? I just hope the other AP is not lost.
Also since there is no expiry date on the AP, is it to be taken as its valid only for 1 year from the date of issue? We never had to use our 1st AP.
more...
jliechty
June 26th, 2006, 09:20 PM
Nikon is taking their time with this one, as they're taking their time with the WT-3 transmitter for the D200. I am interested, but by now I've invested a bit too heavily in a DNG-based workflow by converting everything to DNG and attaching IPTC metadata, to consider Capture NX as a serious contender for my workflow. Though, I do imagine that I'd use it for those rare times when I need a really high quality conversion for very large printing.