Previous -2 - 4
In response to:

Syria's Explosive Crumbs

gkafantaris Wrote: Aug 08, 2012 12:42 AM
Iran should note that helping a drowning man can get you drowned as well. And Arabs will shed no tears should the Iranian regime go down with Assad. It will be two birds of a feather going down with the same stone.
In response to:

Alternative Health Care Reforms

gkafantaris Wrote: Jun 24, 2012 10:00 PM
So you don't like the individual mandate in the health care law. Fine. What would you replace it with? Why do you think Newt Gingrich back in Hillary's days was for it -- after they had looked at everything else? There was no way around it. "The insurance mandate is socialism, plain and simple." If it's socialism, you'd have to buy it from the government, which would also tell you what doctor or hospital to go to. But you can buy health insurance from anybody, and you can get treated by the doctor and hospital you want. What's socialist about that? "Can't you see, the government is making us buy insurance. We have no choice in the matter." Do you have a choice not to get hurt, or not to get sick? Why then do you want a choice not
Mitt is no betting man like John McCain. His safest choice is still Rob Portman, and he will pick him soon enough. In the meantime, Mitt will continue to tease the others, along the path laid out by Queen Elizabeth for broadening support 500 years ago. The shrewd Queen used the interests of her many suitors then to transform a fledgling country into the powerhouse of Europe. Yes, the VP sweepstakes demand shrewdness -- but also give us a chance to see if the candidate can navigate the country. The process has presented a wealth of opportunities for Mitt thus far and he has made the most of them. Not bad.
In response to:

Presidential Overreach

gkafantaris Wrote: Jun 19, 2012 2:11 PM
Mitt is no betting man like John McCain. His safest choice is still Rob Portman, and he will pick him soon enough. In the meantime, Mitt will continue to tease the others, along the path laid out by Queen Elizabeth for broadening support 500 years ago. The shrewd Queen used the interests of her many suitors then to transform a fledgling country into the powerhouse of Europe. Yes, the VP sweepstakes demand shrewdness -- but also give us a chance to see if the candidate can navigate the country. The process has presented a wealth of opportunities for Mitt thus far and he has made the most of them. Not bad.
The derivative hedging game played by JPMorgan Chase is no different than that played by AIG in 2008. Yet Jamie Dimon tells us that JPMorgan had merely “made a terrible, egregious mistake.” He might as well have said that the bank was wrong to keep raising in a poker game when it was apparent it should have folded. And why was JPMorgan busy betting in the first place -- right after our economic meltdown, and while fighting government regulation? One answer is that it knew it could bear the gambling losses. That’s right. With $2 trillion at hand, JPMorgan can yawn when $3 billion goes down the tube. Nonetheless, Dimon tells us that he sees no problem with the government dismantling big failing banks. This is good to know because the go
In response to:

The Volcker Rule

gkafantaris Wrote: May 14, 2012 2:18 PM
The derivative hedging game played by JPMorgan Chase is no different than that played by AIG in 2008. Yet, Jamie Dimon tells us that Chase had merely “made a terrible, egregious mistake.” He might as well have said that Chase was wrong in raising in a game of poker, when it would have been more prudent and folded. But why was Chase busy gambling in the first place -- right after our economic meltdown, and while fighting government regulation? One answer is because Chase could bear the gambling losses. That’s right. With $2 trillion at hand, Chase can yawn when $3 billion goes down the tube. Nonetheless, Dimon tells us that he sees no problem with the government dismantling big failing banks. This is nice to know because the governmen
In response to:

Saucy Apple

gkafantaris Wrote: Apr 30, 2012 2:10 PM
The states should impose a minimum corporate tax against companies like Apple that have gotten too clever for our own good. If Apple does business in the United States, then it should pay a minimum state tax that will be shared by all the states where it actually does business. And if Nevada does not want the tax, its share should go to the states that do. Either way, the company must pay an overall state minimum tax. This should discourage the bogus operation centers now set up in places like Reno. And if Apple decides to pack up and move altogether to Ireland, the Netherlands, or wherever, the states should deem such move an effort to skirt state tax laws -- and should impose stiff penalties. Since a corporate minimum tax is not a . . .
Previous -2 - 4