IntenseDebate

14 years ago @ Cranach: The Blog of V... - Credit card reform · 0 replies · +1 points

Sorry Dr. Veith but I have to agree with Steven. You would be supporting yet another government intrusion into the free market.

Just think about it for a minute. Credit cards are unsecured meaning that the bank who offers you the credit is not asking you for any collateral. If you default on the "loan" (which is exactly what a credit card is), there is nothing for the bank to do but right it off. Contrast that with a mortgage loan or even a car loan. If the consumer fails to pay, the bank at least has an asset that they can sell to get back some of its money.

The latest statistics show that consumer default on credit card debt is up (I think the number I saw was 4.5% up from 4.25% or something like that). With increased risk of default, the banks raise interest rates and fees. This is how the banks manage their risk. If the government steps in to say they can no longer do that, the banks will need to manage their risk by some other means. Usually that would be withholding credit from the most risky consumers.

Bottom line - Dr. Veith, resist the dark side! Take responsbility for your own actions!

14 years ago @ Cranach: The Blog of V... - Not letting the Republ... · 0 replies · +1 points

Unfortunately, I have nothing that show statistics or anything like that. I have information that I heard on Issues Etc. and I also know of at least one family who has appeared at my church's door for this reason.

14 years ago @ Cranach: The Blog of V... - Not letting the Republ... · 0 replies · +1 points

Issues Etc. covered this story early in the week with an open microphone segment. It was quite interesting - several listeners commented that they would leave the party or they would cease to send donations to the party.

Personally, I am an independent. There was a time when I was a registered Republican but I think the party has strayed over the years. I think the latest shift away from the standard Republican positions on lower taxes, less government, and strengthening the family started in the late 1980's. This is just another step away from those positions. I don't see any reason to become a Republican today.

It may be that this is an issue that wakes up the rank and file (in a similar way that ELCA's position on ordaining homosexuals is waking up the members of that church body). If the Republicans change their platform, I think it will hurt them in 2010 and potentially kill them as a political force by 2012.

15 years ago @ Cranach: The Blog of V... - Socialism shoots up in... · 0 replies · +1 points

I think it has more to do with a lack of understanding of what the different systems are as well as a lack of understanding of our sinful state.

15 years ago @ Cranach: The Blog of V... - City vs. Country vs. S... · 0 replies · +1 points

Cities certainly provide a center for culture - the arts, libraries, etc. However, cities also consume vast quantities of stuff. For example, if you look at history - back in the 1800's when homes were heated with wood and wood was also used to cook food, trees would be stripped from the surrounding areas for miles to provide suffient wood. Cities also require vast amounts of food to be shipped in to feed the population. Add to that the materials used for paving and building and you find that many things must be shipped into cities for them to exist at all.

I think that cities also promote a sense of disconnection from the source of the things needed in the city. For example, in many cities the people are completely disconnected from the source of food. Certain markets are exceptions to this (Fulton Fish Market in NYC for example) but for the most part, the population is not connected to the source of food and other materials. Cities also concentrate population and therefore gain a larger voice is government. If you look at states with large cities, the politics of the state is often dominated by the politics of the city - look at NY, MD, PA, IL, and MI as examples.

15 years ago @ Cranach: The Blog of V... - City vs. Country vs. S... · 0 replies · +1 points

I have to agree - I see little or no value in suburbia. It tends to be the land of "I am rich enough to live outside of the city." It is very consumer oriented with little sense of community or self-reliance that you find in the country.

15 years ago @ Cranach: The Blog of V... - The rebirth of Star Trek · 0 replies · +1 points

I have to agree that B5 is the best scifi series. DS9 is second but not a close second. Both show the dark side as well as the light side of culture and I thought both tackled very interesting topics.

15 years ago @ Cranach: The Blog of V... - Nuclear disarmament · 0 replies · +1 points

With today's concerns about collateral damage, my fear is that there would be intense pressure not to use such a response and that the pressure would increase as the time between the attack and the response increased.

15 years ago @ Cranach: The Blog of V... - Nuclear disarmament · 0 replies · +1 points

Carl,

I agree completely that any anti-missile system will not be 100%. But for the most part we are not dealing with a US-Russia exchange. In today's world, it seems that a state with a few missiles is the more likely (hopefully still unlikely) scenario.

15 years ago @ Cranach: The Blog of V... - Nuclear disarmament · 4 replies · +1 points

Carl,

Yes, the US did that but at the time the US and Japan were locked in a "total war." Cities had already been targeted. Today is a different world. If you had a country that was run by a despot and that despot launched a single missile against the US (or France or the UK) or potentially a close ally, I think it would be very difficult for the US to launch nuclear weapons in response. I think the public outcry would be huge and the personal guilt faced by the US President (or the PM of France or the UK) would be so huge that it would be very hard to do. There are of course many variables. For example, if the decision to respond is made as the missile is in flight, there is a higher likelihood of an actual response but as the time between the nuclear explosion and the response grows, I think that the likelihood of a response grows smaller.

IntenseDebate Comment System

Connect with EricM

People I'm following

EricM