News and Current Events - 2012

[oilgun]

John Travolta is trending on Twitter right now and you'll never guess why, lol!:

Apparently John Travolta has an 8 inch dick...

John Travolta Sued By Masseur For Assault And Sexual Battery

Not only did Travolta allegedly try to have sex with the masseur, but he is also said to have told the plantiff -- identified only as "John Doe" -- that he "got where he is now due to sexual favors he had performed when he was in his 'Welcome Back, Kotter' days," and that "Hollywood is controlled by homosexual Jewish men who expect favors in return for sexual activity."

The lawsuit spares few details of the allegedly exchange: when the masseur says he reminded Travolta that sexual acts in exchange for money were illegal, the actor's rebuttal is stated as, "Come on dude, I’ll jerk you off!" The suit also describes Travolta's genitalia as "roughly 8 inches in length" with pubic hair that was "wirey and unkempt."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/07/john-travolta-masseur-lawsuit-gay_n_1498005.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000003

I have to believe this story, hitting on masseurs seems to be his M.O.  A few years ago my shrink, of all people, claimed that a masseur friend of his was propositioned by Travolta when he was in Toronto.  He was not amused.

[Tony_]

 I know, I know, we can't expect much from terrorists or fundamentalists.  But their pattern of capturing aid workers and taking their lives when demands are not met is past hellish.  The latest is Warren Weinstein, who was forced to publicly plead for his life just these last 2 days.
 There is a lot of suffering in the world, but torture is one of the worst, as is also capturing and terrorizing the innocent.

 My heart goes out to his family.

[janjo]

John Maynard Keynes suggested that in such a situation as the Great Depression, the government should intervene to spend its way out of debt, e.g., employ the unemployed in public works. It worked very well in WWII which brought about full employment. Instead of collapsing into depression after the end of WWII withdrew government support, a consumer boom took over in the private sector and we grew our way out of considerable debt. Austerity measures tend to make people hold on to what little cash they have instead of putting it into the economy, which makes the economy shrink, which makes people hold on to their cash even more, which...

..............sometimes leads them to right wing extremism...........................................

[Sandy]

The French situation was discussed last week or the week before on a couple "news" programs. The new guy is NOT into cutting back spending which has the members of that European alliance terribly worried. Couple that with the Greeks not wanting to go along... doesn't sound good.

He is not inro cutting back spending, which means that he is not linto lowering GDP, which means he is not increasing the debt burden. (The lower GDP falls, the higher debt becomes as a percentage of GDP and the more costlier is becomes to service that debt.) Oh, and when GDP falls, the tax base shrinks, making it that much harder to service existing debt.

If the government cuts spending, that sends a signal to the private sector that there isn't GDP growth in the offing, so instead they sit on their cash, do not spend, do not invest and do not create new jobs. Which is what has been happening since 2007. Austerity is a recipe for a downward spiral of growth and increasing misery.

I'd say, the election results in France are a good thing for the economy.

[doodler]

You'd be in the minority.

The German head of whatever that alliance is called said flat out yesterday that NO deals would be changed.

[Lyle (Mooska)]

You'd be in the minority.

The German head of whatever that alliance is called said flat out yesterday that NO deals would be changed.

A majority of people at one time thought that the earth was flat, too.

[Lyle (Mooska)]

Really?   What a waste of internet server space.   When the chips are down, he's gonna take a stand that will get him the most votes, and here's a news flash, that doesn't include supporting gay marriage.

What you say is conventional wisdom--that if a President supported marriage equality
they would lose votes, or at least not gain any, but it's also a meme without any facts
to back it up since no President has actually run in an election where they publically
supported such a thing.

It's like the Hollywood meme that if an A-List male movie star came out as gay,
their career would tank and no one would go see their films.  This has never
occurred so we don't know what would or might happen.

Maybe John Travolata would like to test those waters.

[garyd]

He is not inro cutting back spending, which means that he is not linto lowering GDP, which means he is not increasing the debt burden. (The lower GDP falls, the higher debt becomes as a percentage of GDP and the more costlier is becomes to service that debt.) Oh, and when GDP falls, the tax base shrinks, making it that much harder to service existing debt.

If the government cuts spending, that sends a signal to the private sector that there isn't GDP growth in the offing, so instead they sit on their cash, do not spend, do not invest and do not create new jobs. Which is what has been happening since 2007. Austerity is a recipe for a downward spiral of growth and increasing misery.

I'd say, the election results in France are a good thing for the economy.

I sincerely hope you are correct, Sandy, but I also sincerely "feel" you may be wrong.
The French did not elect Holland to increase spending to stimulate the economy, they elected him to increase spending on social services (or to reinstate it to prior levels) and to increase government employees. (already 22% of total French employment).  

The French GDP is already fairly healthy:
http://www.insee.fr/en/themes/info-rapide.asp?id=26

The French are already notorious for driving thriving, job creating jobs out of the country.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/15/AR2006071501010.html

The cold, harsh light of reality may already be setting in subsequent to the election.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/08/us-france-spending-idUSBRE8470QE20120508

Sarkozy may have been, and probably was, an "ass" in many ways especially his perceived embrace of hideous right wing social agendas.  He was, however, a pretty smart guy when it came to the economy.  

[Sandy]

Hi gary,

 I would respectfully submit that "increasing spending on social services (or to reinstate it to prior levels) and increasing government employees," would stimulate the economy. Because both would increase the cash in the pockets of consumers (even government employees are consumers). So it would be good for growth.

The key is not absolute GDP, but GDP to debt. Economic contraction implies fewer resources to pay off debt. Growth tends to reduce debt as a proportion of GDP. But enough of a stimulus could lead to the level of growth in the economy that would then allow the private sector to come back in and start investing (as after WWII). I'm not calling for permanent rises in government spending, but enough to jump-start the economy.

As for sending jobs overseas, yes, they could use more flexibility in their domestic job market. But then they have immigrants coming in to take jobs, as well.

There are plenty of "smart" people (also called Very Serious Persons) who don't necessarily get it right about the economy. Paul Ryan comes to mind.

[Sandy]

You'd be in the minority.

The German head of whatever that alliance is called said flat out yesterday that NO deals would be changed.

If the majority could provide valid economic reasons for the positions they're taking, I might listen. There is simply a lot of economic "noise" out there, and we have to become better consumers of economic ideas or risk having the wool pulled over our eyes.

[garyd]

Hi gary,

 I would respectfully submit that "increasing spending on social services (or to reinstate it to prior levels) and increasing government employees," would stimulate the economy. Because both would increase the cash in the pockets of consumers (even government employees are consumers). So it would be good for growth.

Agreed. However, if one does not have revenue coming in to pay for social services and additional government jobs then one must either borrow or print.  Both cause major problems in the long run.  In addition, over the last several years France has pushed much of the government bureaucracy down to the local level(and local agencies have increased staff to handle the increase in work)  but it has not reduced, now redundant, staffing at the Federal level.  Finally, France has a decent infrastructure so hiring or contracting to build highways, bridges, enhanced rail service is not realistic.  So, what are these new government employees supposed to do? And finally, finally, consumer consumption appears to be healthy and exports are also healthy. In this regard, the French economic situation is a bit different from that of the U.S.

The key is not absolute GDP, but GDP to debt. Economic contraction implies fewer resources to pay off debt. Growth tends to reduce debt as a proportion of GDP. But enough of a stimulus could lead to the level of growth in the economy that would then allow the private sector to come back in and start investing (as after WWII). I'm not calling for permanent rises in government spending, but enough to jump-start the economy.

True, but according to the articles I attached, it will take an extraordinary kick start to stimulate the economy much above historic growth patterns.  AND, I still do not see anything from Holland suggesting that his government plans to spend money on stimulus.  He is simply relying upon natural growth which is far below what he needs to pay for his campaign promises.

As for sending jobs overseas, yes, they could use more flexibility in their domestic job market. But then they have immigrants coming in to take jobs, as well.

According to what I can glean, France is not so much sending jobs overseas as it is depressing job creation by forcing those that have the money to create jobs to locate their tax base elsewhere.  A 40 some odd percent employer funded social security tax is also a bit of an impediment.  (though, of course, French industry does not supply health insurance as it does here in the U.S. so there is a bit of an offset.)

There are plenty of "smart" people (also called Very Serious Persons) who don't necessarily get it right about the economy. Paul Ryan comes to mind.

LOL, very true. No argument from me on this point. 

Look, the French people are quite happy with and have come to expect a seriously robust social service program.  Fine with me.
They are going to have to face facts, however, when it comes to funding these programs.
Holland is, more than likely , going to be forced to increase taxes across the board which means passive tax increases by eliminating many of the French tax exemptions,(similar to what Reagan did), which will infuriate the middle class who have long relied upon the wealthy to fund the lion's share of the cost of the social programs.

[janjo]

You'd be in the minority.

The German head of whatever that alliance is called said flat out yesterday that NO deals would be changed.

Do I take it that by "the German head of whatever" you mean Chancellor Merkel, and that "whatever that alliance is called" is the European Union?

[doodler]

A majority of people at one time thought that the earth was flat, too.

The difference here is France is part of this group voluntarily and agreed to the economic terms it set. I don't think anyone held a gun to their collective head. Now they want to change it up.

[doodler]

Do I take it that by "the German head of whatever" you mean Chancellor Merkel, and that "whatever that alliance is called" is the European Union?

Yes.

[doodler]

These countries banded together to... level the playing field? Try to keep the economic situation for the entire area under control? Perhaps they shouldn't have. Perhaps it's an impossibility. They ARE separate countries, after all. (Would Canada, the US and Mexico even think of doing something similar?) But the truth is, they did it. If they want to UNdo it, there is a right way and a wrong way and EITHER way, somebody's going to get hurt.