On Council meets Monday on how to use stimulus

Posted on May 14 at 10:58 a.m. ( Suggest removal )

The argument that tax payers should provide entertainment for kids is a wash. There are countless wholesome, healthy things kids can do without going to a skating rink or whatever. Tax money should be spent on necessities. Entertainment is NOT a necessity. Let the skate parks/rinks be run by private entities. If they are making money, the parks will remain open. If they are not making money, they will close. But don't take money away from more pressing needs for something as trivial as entertainment.

On Obama doesn’t lie; he implies, misdirects, misleads

Posted on September 28 at 10:07 a.m. ( Suggest removal )

I'm curious...if there is still no finalized healthcare bill (and here we are near the end of September), what exactly were they going to vote on before the August recess? It seems like a reasonable question.

On Schools struggle with cell phone policies

Posted on March 31 at 12:49 p.m. ( Suggest removal )

You know, the argument for having a cell phone hs always been, "in case of emergency". However, the vast majority of cell phone users are using them for non-emergency purposes. Unless there is a medical reason, a child has no business carrying a cell phone to school. And a parent who allows it is causing yet more insurmountable problems to an educational system which is already over-run with problems that the school cannot solve. The largest problems at schools are problems that begin in the homes of the kids. The schools can't fix those problems. It's insane. You have to have a license to catch a fish but anyone can have a child. Parents need to be parents if the schools are to have any hope. This cell phone issue is just another in a long line excuses for not attending school...let me clarify...just because you are at the school doesn't mean your head is in the books where it belongs.

On Republicans criticize Obama's budget plan

Posted on March 14 at 11:38 p.m. ( Suggest removal )

Blame whoever you want. This kind of spending is unsustainable. The "earmark" crap is unacceptable. And the lack of true representative government is unconscionable. Both repubs and dems have brought us to this point. To debate the partisan ownership of the problems we face is a distraction. The bottom line is, if you're not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem. The best way to eliminate partisanship bickering is to eliminate the partisans. It's like an ant bed...you can knock over the mound but it will be rebuilt by morning. You have to get rid of the ants.

On Council meets Monday on how to use stimulus

Posted on March 14 at 11:30 p.m. ( Suggest removal )

Just remember, when the stimulus money runs out, the state will have to pick up the tab. Texas turned down the $55 million for extended unemployment benefits just for that reason. Maybe Janesville can have the $55 million that Texas rejected. Taking the money without considering the potential long term effects sounds a lot like what happened in much of the housing bubble. Where will the money come from once the stimulus cash is gone? Stimulus 2, I suppose.

On Fed says US economy will get worse in 2009

Posted on March 13 at 10:11 p.m. ( Suggest removal )

3 ways to deal with the tremendous debt our government has taken on:

1) Raise taxes...significantly,

2) Inflate our currency...significantly, or

3) Reduce government spending...significantly.

Our current president is the product of one of the most (if not, the most) corrupt political systems in the nation (Chicago). I wonder what would be reasonable for us to expect?

On President Obama’s vision offers change we voted for

Posted on March 13 at 10:03 p.m. ( Suggest removal )

It may be last year's business but Obama signed it this year. His signature = his baby.

On Line-item veto for Obama? Janesville-based proposal says yes

Posted on March 8 at 12:08 a.m. ( Suggest removal )

Why is the only bipartisan thing to come out of our government pork? It used to be called "riders". Then, it was called wasteful spending (which is what it is). Then it was called pork. Now we call it earmarks. I guess earmarks is a more politically correct way to say wasteful spending. Wouldn't want to bruise anyone's self-esteem, would we?

On Line-item veto for Obama? Janesville-based proposal says yes

Posted on March 8 at 12:04 a.m. ( Suggest removal )

I guess the issues discussed at the "fiscal responsibility summit" didn't cover spending money that one does not have. It seems to me that that's how we got here in the first place. I don't know what kind of economics they are teaching at Harvard these days but I think Mr. Obama should see about getting a refund from the university.

On Obama signs massive stimulus package

Posted on March 7 at 11:59 p.m. ( Suggest removal )

Do you see the same problem I see coming down the road with respect to reverse mortgages? I see that as being a huge bubble just waiting to inflate and explode. As I've said in the past...many of the folks who will be responsible for paying off that debt would never have qualified for the loan in the first place. Therefore, the lending institutions will once again be stuck with a lot of real estate and once again, the real estate market will be flooded, and once again, the value of homes will fall. Sound familiar?