I think perhaps we are getting a bit too non-train political for this forum, but if no one objects, I'll continue unless someone complains.
US Military?.. i.e., the one that pays the price so that you can speak your mind? Are you still under the term of obligation? (Generally, one serves actively for a set period and the contract is for x years past that in the IRR with occasional muster calls.
I picked the word "a" carefully. Israeli. I got out of it because of medical and family reasons. They could still (technically) call me back for non-combatant work, but in the 5 years since I left, I haven't been so far.
"My main issue in this election is the economy"
That's what I wanted to know. Sometimes, on this forum it comes across (not necessarily from you) that Amtrak funding is the litmus test. If it is, so be it, especially to an Amtrak employee. Some believe that the current economy has its roots in other-than Bernanke's policies. Do you agree, GML?
The roots of our economy, (and I wrote a term paper on this, by the way) stems back to Harry S. Truman and Dwight David Eisenhower. Franklin Delano Roosevelt, in an attempt to restore our economy in the 1930s, selected as a muse one John Maynard Keynes, or so it seems. He was clearly applying Keynesian economic theory. That theory includes (I don't know if you know economics, so I'm sorry if I'm droning on about stuff you already know) the concept of using governmental intervention to flatten the economic cycle.
Roosevelt, according to that theory, poured government money into the economy, which helped a good way to reviving it (so did the war economy of WW2, of course). The theory basically suggests that the government should put in when times are bad (government spending, lower taxes)- and take out when times are good (lower government aide, increased taxes). Its been known to work well in long term political systems.
Unfortunately, the United States is not such a system. At the end of the war, taxes were, for the most part, reduced by Eisenhower, government spending was not curtailed all that much, and taxes were not raised to repay the costs, and building up a reserve for the next econominc downturn. Its hard to sell the typical american on higher taxes/lower services. People tend to want things NOW, and they, unfortunately, also vote NOW.
At this point, I think we are in a time when the government needs to pour money in. McCain, and the general republican stance on economics, are not in going with that concept.
Written somewhere is the possibility of Mr. Obama choosing former Senator Sam Nunn as his running mate. That would be palatable. He was an excellent Senator, and a statesman (versus a politician). He ran for President in 199x. Go check out his platform. He ran on the belief that terrorism would be our next greatest challenge. Insightful. He understands the military and has a brilliant mature mind that would be a compliment to Mr. Obama. GML, who do you think should be some of the teammates?
I have a great deal respect for two men who I'd consider to be more statesmen than politicians (although they are still basically politicians). Those two men are Michael Bloomberg and Joe Corzine. Bloomberg is conservative, (we are talking financially, not socially) Corzine being more liberal. I'd like to see both of them in his cabinet.
Abraham Lincoln, in my opinion, is the best president this country has ever had. One of his most intelligent decisions (although not so bright in light of him dying, I'll admit) was his cabinet of rivals. I hope Obama has the chutzpah to select people he disagrees with, and people who disagree with each other, but are the best for their jobs.
Its sad. The last kind of person you want to run a country is a politician. Yet only a politician is capable of being elected. (this is a philosophical, rather than direct, statement)
