Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Ag park, airport highlighted in D.C. trip

Local delegation holds Capitol Hill meetings to lobby support

March 14, 2013

Expanding the industrial park known as Iowa’s Crossroads of Global Innovation was a frequent topic of discussion Wednesday as Fort Dodge area representatives met with federal officials in the......

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(16)

Anderson

Mar-18-13 4:56 PM

The devil can sight scripture, ColB, but I would remind you that Republicans proposed reining in Fanny and Freddie before before subprime and Alt-B mortgage originations got totally out of hand and Senator OBAMA cast the deciding vote that killed the Republicans' effort. In similar vein, Obama's earlier promotion of subprime mortgages in Illinois had flattened the Pritsker family bank in Chicago already in 1996.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Colonelbanters

Mar-17-13 5:11 PM

Don't forget that a man named George W. Bush strongly promoted Fannie & Freddie as well.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Anderson

Mar-17-13 2:20 PM

...for details. It's the best account to date, quite unbiased.)

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Anderson

Mar-17-13 2:18 PM

It is the federal tax system itself that militates for corporate consolidation and cronyism, ColB, compounded by political actions to promote, benefit or save one or more corporations or one or more unions' members without respect to inevitable harmful effects on others, as Hazlitt to clearly explains - and we saw recently with the Democrats' not-so "affordable housing program" that even Harry Reid's Democrat senate investigators lay "at the Heart of" the housing boom & bust and the financial and economics problems stemming therefrom. Remember, it was quasi-govt'al Fannie and Freddie, promoted by Dodd, Frank AND, yes, Obama as community organizer & Senator, that held 85% of the home mortgages, 55% of them toxic sub-prime. Many Iowans lost a bundle in F&F stock, as did we all when pvt banks that succumbed to Democrat pressures to join in the MBS sub-prime game or else and then went under (see Morgenson & Rosners' "Reckless Endangerment" fo

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Colonelbanters

Mar-17-13 5:00 AM

Totally agree Trooper. Of course, that would actually be a meaningful conversation so, that probably rules that one out-lol!

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

FDTROOPER

Mar-16-13 11:53 AM

I hope they talk about the FD****as a future water source...

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Colonelbanters

Mar-16-13 4:05 AM

...the health insurance industry insisting that we still need them in this world so badly that we must make it law, we are being taken to town by large corporations and industry lobbiests to a severe extent. The government is an embarrassment these days but, they only make so little sense because of who is pulling the strings of government-and it isn't the people anymore!

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Colonelbanters

Mar-16-13 4:02 AM

The free market doesn't exist now the way it once did but, not because of some liberal agenda drummed-up by Rush or Faux News, it doesn't exist properly because it has alreasdy been squeezing people dry and can't expand the way it wants to so, we now have big industries flat-out cheating every aspect of the systems to make artificial gains such as the banks and their heist of our money right before Bush left office. Isn't it odd that they lured people into a system of lending that shouldn't have been there in the free market but, were because they were lied to by the big banks and in the end, the banks made a great profit, no one from the banks had to do jail time AND we all had to pay for it? I think that's very odd indeed and that is what the "free market" looks like today. Whether it's the banks telling us we NEED to give them $800 billion or...

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Colonelbanters

Mar-16-13 3:53 AM

Gradual elimination of the free market Anderson? I'm not sure whether or not I agree with that. What we sort of have now if the free market that went so wild, it could not expand fast enough to keep up with shareholder's demand and thus, the capitalists have enormous sums of money to throw at OUR representatives in office to get things done in their favor over the favor of the people. In a sense, this means that it is not much of a free market as the free market, when pressured, will almost always fail when further expansion is not possible to the degree desired by large corporations. Having said that, the massive corporations control what we citizens can and can't do and even tell us what we shuould like or not like. This is not "free market" behavior-it's called fascism. The regulatory agencies are nearly powerless anymore to keep any reigns on big companies polluting and paying low wages(what the Republicans want every day).

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Anderson

Mar-15-13 2:26 PM

Thanks, gssmms, but they should really go to soundco for reminding us of that great book, and FEE, of course. I have dug out and reread, marveling how with only experience, intelligence and common sense someone with no formal economic training not only managed to summarize Mises & Hayek so succinctly but so simply explain how their ideas work out in politically-inspired practices we have all observed if old enough and were at all observant. You will find every short chapter is written with equal lucidity. Enjoy!

0 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

iRoxxu

Mar-15-13 11:27 AM

Government should not be in the business of making profits... . . rather governing for the people. Otherwise we're only one transaction away from being Chinese owned.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gssmms

Mar-14-13 7:28 PM

Thanks for the link info, Anderson. Only a bit into it and already see the "Broken Glass" fallacy (pg. 11) at work on this and so many other issues of gub-mint allocations. Assuming finite capital, then "support" for the FD endeavors will mean other endeavors, elsewhere, will NOT be funded. Then begins the comparison of these endeavors in FD... and whether they should be paid for as necessary business equipment by the private corporations & ultimately by their customers in a transparent and free-market model... or whether these are public-benefit infrastructure investments. Fortunately for us, Gub-mint does NOT seem to work on finite capital, but rather fiat currency, and the false argument is continually presented that by supporting the projects here AND other projects elsewhere, they've "stimulated" or "advanced" the economy. In other words, we can have both the new window AND the new suit... guns AND butter... as long as it's only fiat

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Anderson

Mar-14-13 4:38 PM

PS: The full text of "Economics in One Lesson" can be read - & downloaded - free at fee dot org. (All econ illiterates please note.)

1 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Anderson

Mar-14-13 11:16 AM

On the other hand, ColB, with the gradual elimination of the free market system, which had carried the US to the very top economically, by incessant federal govt intrusions, most at the hands of Democrats, and with Obama determined to eliminate any vestiges thereof, one might forgive Republicans for trying to get some share of what uninformed voters (like Cranky) falsely believe to be cost-free largess rather than their own (or their kids" & grandkids') taxes funneled through a very inefficient, dysfunctional bureaucracy. For those here who don't understand how markets work in terms of supply and demand and of the pricing mechanism for capital, labor and product, you could do more good for yourself - and the country - than to read Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson," esp. Chapters. XV, XIX, XX & XXII.

1 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

movedon

Mar-14-13 9:58 AM

A lot of the Grants such as the Aviation Trust Fund are generated by the industry in a Ticket Tax to put back in the industry. To "self support" these improvement and air service. The problem is the Democrates have raided these funds for unrelated welfare program.

1 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Colonelbanters

Mar-14-13 2:08 AM

I don't know about anyone else but, nothing makes my head spin like reading about a bunch of Republicans who decry federal spending and "socialism"-excited about getting a whole bunch of socialized subsidies to prop-up a community. I guess that "free-market" stuff is just pillow talk-lol!

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 16 of 16 comments
 
 

 

I am looking for: