The debt ceiling deal does NOT slash spending in the next year or two, while the economy is so fragile; PROTECTS the social safety net; and does NOT close the door on increased revenues from the rich (or Exxon). To my friends who are quick to assume the President has unaccountably become a different person (uncaring? slothful? dim-witted?) when we don’t get what we want on our timetable, I’d say I totally share the frustration – as I’m quite sure the President does. But I direct most of it at the opposition, whose first priority is to see him fail and whose second priority is to protect billionaires from paying anywhere close to the 28% rate on investment income they paid under Ronald Reagan (second greatest man who ever lived).
More on this in the coming days, I assume.
IF YOU DON’T LIKE TAXES
Peter Snow suggests Republicans read this list of things not to do. It’s a little simple-minded – but so is the argument that smaller government and lower taxes are always best.
Jeff Cash: “Thanks for the DVAX tip. I bought on July 26th and have enjoyed the 20% pop! But I’m confused by something, and suspect that other readers might be, as well. On July 26, you wrote: ‘Guru says he agrees with this report from William Blair that puts the fair market value at $8.’ . . . but then Friday: ‘Target for the stock over the next 6 to 12 months is 6 or higher.’ I’m baffled as to why guru went, in 3 days, from a current fair market value of $8 to a hope for $6+, when the only thing happening in the interim was GOOD news….???”
☞ Good question. Stock valuation is, in the first place, in no way an exact science. (And I guess I should point out that “6 or higher” would include 8.) But if something DOES have a fair market value of 8, that doesn’t mean it will SELL for 8 – especially in a bad market when people need to be tempted with great bargains to take any risk. Sometimes, specific stocks or market sectors – and often the market as a whole – tend to be undervalued. Other times, overvalued.
Quote of the Day
In 1800, 75% of [an American's] working man's expenditures went for food alone. By 1850, that had dropped to 50%. Today it is a little more than 11%.~The Wall Street Journal, September 20, 1996
Request email delivery
- Oct 20:
Melvin Reddick / Andrew Sullivan / Richard Painter
- Oct 19:
- Oct 18:
Gregg Popovich: Teaching Software To Write Software
- Oct 17:
Hurtling Toward The Future
- Oct 16:
He’s Baaaaaack . . .
- Oct 13:
Mikey’s Last Breakfast
- Oct 12:
- Oct 11:
Why Corporate Tax Cuts Won’t Create Jobs
- Oct 10:
A Letter From Secretary Albright
- Oct 9:
- Oct 20: