Macaca
07-24 08:04 AM
Reform, the FDR way (http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-shlaes23jul23,1,2603353.story) Democrats are right to revere Roosevelt, but even he knew when to reform his own reforms. By Amity Shlaes, AMITY SHLAES is the author of "The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression," a syndicated columnist for Bloomberg News and a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. July 23, 2007
WHERE'S the fun? That's the feeling you get watching the Democrats in Washington this summer. Gone is the happy plan for a frenzy of lawmaking, the "Hundred Hours" of action Speaker Nancy Pelosi promised when the Democrats took the House. The speaker's artful allusion to Franklin D. Roosevelt's "Hundred Days" quickly became an ironic echo. During that first euphoric legislative period, Roosevelt managed to rescue the banking system from disaster, assist bankrupted farmers, rewrite the economics of agriculture and the rules for flailing businesses, bring back beer � you name it. Contemporary leaders can't even act on pressing issues such as agriculture and immigration, not to mention Social Security.
Why can't politicians be Roosevelts today? For an answer, let's look to the middle of 1935, about two years into FDR's New Deal and the equivalent of about now in the election cycle. The federal government was still smaller than the nation's state and local governments combined. Two out of 10 men were unemployed. FDR took the economic emergency as a powerful mandate for further lawmaking. He jumped into the project with all the glee of a boy leaping into a sandbox. The papers reported that he was going to "blast out of committee" yet another round of bills, and blast he did � that year the country's premier labor law, the Wagner Act, was passed, as was Social Security.
At about the same time, Roosevelt slapped together the Rural Electrification Administration, which came on top of the New Deal's large farm subsidies. For construction workers, artists and writers, he created � also in mid-1935 � the Works Progress Administration, which hired the unemployed, including artists, craftsmen and journalists. To appreciate the size of that gift, imagine a contemporary politician responding to a market crash by putting ex-employees of Google on the federal payroll. The president also built on to an already large structure, the Public Works Administration, which funded town halls, grammar schools and swimming pools in 3,000 counties. The money? Roosevelt passed a tax increase that opponents called the "soak the rich" act. It contained an estate tax rate hike that would make John Edwards drool. By 1936, the government took up more than 9% of gross domestic product. For the first peacetime year in U.S. history, Washington had edged past the state and local governments in size to become a larger part of the national economy. (Just a few years earlier, state and local governments had been twice as large as Washington.) FDR had reversed the old crucial ratio of federalism, and Washington has dominated the country ever since.
Those early commitments set a trend of promises. Some of them became what we now call entitlements. Lyndon Johnson in the 1960s layered on governmental commitments with the Great Society. President Bush has heaped on more, with a new entitlement: prescription drugs for seniors. Only a narrow part of the federal budget remains for discretionary spending � the part left over for new ideas. And setting aside the question of whether an individual program is good, bad or simply in need of an overhaul, we've found as a country that old commitments are simply too hard to undo.
This is partly because of the way the political game works. When you seek to take away a benefit from one targeted recipient, he will fight like crazy to keep it � think of the ferocious battles the farm lobby wages over even tiny reductions in agricultural subsidies. Those who gain from reducing the size of the handout, however, are members of the lobbyless general public who will receive only an incremental advantage, maybe the equivalent of a penny or two apiece. So the rest of us don't have the incentive or ability to apply countervailing pressure. Yet that's exactly what we need today: the energy and exhilaration of FDR in his first term.
Today's timidity would have disturbed FDR, who had no trouble knocking down the sandcastles he had made. Early in the 1930s, he created 4 million jobs with the Civilian Works Administration, then uncreated them when he decided the CWA was too close to the English dole. When he tired of Harold Ickes' Public Works Administration, he scaled it back, and finally abolished it in 1941. As for Ickes' Department of the Interior, FDR decided that it was time to revise it into "a real Conservation Department" � a change many would welcome today.
A few leaders since FDR have persuaded Congress to help them bring about changes on this scale � Ronald Reagan's bipartisan tax reform of 1986 and Bill Clinton's welfare reform a decade later come to mind. These presidents were truer to FDR's spirit than the hesitating Congress of today. Clearing some blank space for new institutions is possible. But lawmakers won't do it if they honor Rooseveltian edifices more than Roosevelt did himself.
WHERE'S the fun? That's the feeling you get watching the Democrats in Washington this summer. Gone is the happy plan for a frenzy of lawmaking, the "Hundred Hours" of action Speaker Nancy Pelosi promised when the Democrats took the House. The speaker's artful allusion to Franklin D. Roosevelt's "Hundred Days" quickly became an ironic echo. During that first euphoric legislative period, Roosevelt managed to rescue the banking system from disaster, assist bankrupted farmers, rewrite the economics of agriculture and the rules for flailing businesses, bring back beer � you name it. Contemporary leaders can't even act on pressing issues such as agriculture and immigration, not to mention Social Security.
Why can't politicians be Roosevelts today? For an answer, let's look to the middle of 1935, about two years into FDR's New Deal and the equivalent of about now in the election cycle. The federal government was still smaller than the nation's state and local governments combined. Two out of 10 men were unemployed. FDR took the economic emergency as a powerful mandate for further lawmaking. He jumped into the project with all the glee of a boy leaping into a sandbox. The papers reported that he was going to "blast out of committee" yet another round of bills, and blast he did � that year the country's premier labor law, the Wagner Act, was passed, as was Social Security.
At about the same time, Roosevelt slapped together the Rural Electrification Administration, which came on top of the New Deal's large farm subsidies. For construction workers, artists and writers, he created � also in mid-1935 � the Works Progress Administration, which hired the unemployed, including artists, craftsmen and journalists. To appreciate the size of that gift, imagine a contemporary politician responding to a market crash by putting ex-employees of Google on the federal payroll. The president also built on to an already large structure, the Public Works Administration, which funded town halls, grammar schools and swimming pools in 3,000 counties. The money? Roosevelt passed a tax increase that opponents called the "soak the rich" act. It contained an estate tax rate hike that would make John Edwards drool. By 1936, the government took up more than 9% of gross domestic product. For the first peacetime year in U.S. history, Washington had edged past the state and local governments in size to become a larger part of the national economy. (Just a few years earlier, state and local governments had been twice as large as Washington.) FDR had reversed the old crucial ratio of federalism, and Washington has dominated the country ever since.
Those early commitments set a trend of promises. Some of them became what we now call entitlements. Lyndon Johnson in the 1960s layered on governmental commitments with the Great Society. President Bush has heaped on more, with a new entitlement: prescription drugs for seniors. Only a narrow part of the federal budget remains for discretionary spending � the part left over for new ideas. And setting aside the question of whether an individual program is good, bad or simply in need of an overhaul, we've found as a country that old commitments are simply too hard to undo.
This is partly because of the way the political game works. When you seek to take away a benefit from one targeted recipient, he will fight like crazy to keep it � think of the ferocious battles the farm lobby wages over even tiny reductions in agricultural subsidies. Those who gain from reducing the size of the handout, however, are members of the lobbyless general public who will receive only an incremental advantage, maybe the equivalent of a penny or two apiece. So the rest of us don't have the incentive or ability to apply countervailing pressure. Yet that's exactly what we need today: the energy and exhilaration of FDR in his first term.
Today's timidity would have disturbed FDR, who had no trouble knocking down the sandcastles he had made. Early in the 1930s, he created 4 million jobs with the Civilian Works Administration, then uncreated them when he decided the CWA was too close to the English dole. When he tired of Harold Ickes' Public Works Administration, he scaled it back, and finally abolished it in 1941. As for Ickes' Department of the Interior, FDR decided that it was time to revise it into "a real Conservation Department" � a change many would welcome today.
A few leaders since FDR have persuaded Congress to help them bring about changes on this scale � Ronald Reagan's bipartisan tax reform of 1986 and Bill Clinton's welfare reform a decade later come to mind. These presidents were truer to FDR's spirit than the hesitating Congress of today. Clearing some blank space for new institutions is possible. But lawmakers won't do it if they honor Rooseveltian edifices more than Roosevelt did himself.
wallpaper Taylor Swift Our Song Hair.
AgentM
06-04 06:01 PM
My spouse qualifies under cross-chargeability, she filed her I-485 application after mine, with me as the primary applicant. I never mentioned anything about cross-chargeability in my application.
Now the PD is current for "all -other chargeability" how do I check if my I-485 application is going to be picked up?
Any ideas how I can do that?
Thank you.
Now the PD is current for "all -other chargeability" how do I check if my I-485 application is going to be picked up?
Any ideas how I can do that?
Thank you.
H1B2009
07-30 01:54 AM
I am currently a H1B visa holder engaged to a US citizen. We are planning on going to India soon for the formal engagement ceremony and getting married early next year.
I had two points of concern:
1. Upon returning after the engagement, I will still be on H1B (since the wedding is going to be a bit more than 90 days after the official engagement so the K1 visa is not an option), will this cause issues at port of entry?
2. After marriage, we plan to go abroad for our honeymoon (we likely won't have time to file anything with immigration before our return): how should I proceed upon reentry then or is this even advisable since I'll be returning on an H1 but be married to a US citizen?
Any advice would be greatly appreciated, thanks.
I had two points of concern:
1. Upon returning after the engagement, I will still be on H1B (since the wedding is going to be a bit more than 90 days after the official engagement so the K1 visa is not an option), will this cause issues at port of entry?
2. After marriage, we plan to go abroad for our honeymoon (we likely won't have time to file anything with immigration before our return): how should I proceed upon reentry then or is this even advisable since I'll be returning on an H1 but be married to a US citizen?
Any advice would be greatly appreciated, thanks.
2011 Cover of Our Song by Taylor
frostrated
10-01 11:46 PM
H1 and GC are two different processes. Rejection of H1 does not impact GC.
more...
gcprocess
11-06 10:03 PM
Thanks!! for your reply.
I filed my case in July 2nd(filer) and didn't receive my receipt and then again I file the same application/case on Oct 2007. Finally I got both the receipts.
I filed my case in July 2nd(filer) and didn't receive my receipt and then again I file the same application/case on Oct 2007. Finally I got both the receipts.
frostrated
08-05 02:59 PM
Bill Text - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:S.3702:)
A bill has been referred to the committee and sponsored by Sen. Sessions.
Sen. Sessions is very anti-amnesty, and looks like he is pushing a bill for the legal immigrants-in-waiting. We do not yet know the contents of the bill, but hopefully by later this week, the text of the bill would be available in the library of congress.
I think given the current political environment we can get the senators and house representatives to vote in its favor.
Lets see what the actual contents of the bill are tomorrow/day-after.
A bill has been referred to the committee and sponsored by Sen. Sessions.
Sen. Sessions is very anti-amnesty, and looks like he is pushing a bill for the legal immigrants-in-waiting. We do not yet know the contents of the bill, but hopefully by later this week, the text of the bill would be available in the library of congress.
I think given the current political environment we can get the senators and house representatives to vote in its favor.
Lets see what the actual contents of the bill are tomorrow/day-after.
more...
srisra
09-09 01:39 PM
I am working for my current company since 2001 and started GC process in 2003(EB3 10/2003). So far my company paid all expenses towards my GC. I applied for 485 in 8/07.
Recently I got an offer as Manager. This is a much better position.
If I take that offer, will my current employer have the right to cancel I-140(since he incurred all the expenses towards my GC).
My company's current lawyer will definitely send the cancellation of G-28. in addition I am sure he will also intimate that I am not working with my current employer anymore. In addition I am also afraid he might cancel my I-140 with the intimation from my current employer. In this case, is it better for me to approach a new lawyer and send the AC21 letter attaching my new offer before my current lawyer/employer does their process.
Do i need any other letter from my new employer other than the Offer Letter to send the AC21 letter?
I did not tell my new employer that I am now on EAD (becoz he does not understand anything except GC or Citizenship). is it OK if I dont tell beofre I join them?
Thanks guys.
Recently I got an offer as Manager. This is a much better position.
If I take that offer, will my current employer have the right to cancel I-140(since he incurred all the expenses towards my GC).
My company's current lawyer will definitely send the cancellation of G-28. in addition I am sure he will also intimate that I am not working with my current employer anymore. In addition I am also afraid he might cancel my I-140 with the intimation from my current employer. In this case, is it better for me to approach a new lawyer and send the AC21 letter attaching my new offer before my current lawyer/employer does their process.
Do i need any other letter from my new employer other than the Offer Letter to send the AC21 letter?
I did not tell my new employer that I am now on EAD (becoz he does not understand anything except GC or Citizenship). is it OK if I dont tell beofre I join them?
Thanks guys.
2010 Taylor Swift Our Song (cover). 2:51. Wendy B sings Taylor Swifts our song.
njboy
07-18 11:18 AM
as long as your wages are more than the minimum written in flcdatacenter, you should be ok. they dont go over the lca with a toothcomb, infact it is computerized
more...
gcformeornot
01-29 10:04 PM
I meant on IV page......
hair taylor swift our song guitar.
Blog Feeds
05-01 04:30 PM
Very shortly, Congress will consider legislation that could allow 60,000 foreign nurses to come to the US. We face a shortage that will approach a million by the end of the next decade. On a daily basis, the lack of nurses is a serious problem, but not so noticeable to the typical American. But what happens if we have a pandemic and all of a sudden hospitals around the country are called on to deal with hundreds of thousands - perhaps millions - of sick patients at the same time? We're getting a little preview of that right now with...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/05/are-we-playing-with-fire-when-it-comes-to-nursing-immigration.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/05/are-we-playing-with-fire-when-it-comes-to-nursing-immigration.html)
more...
Euclid
02-11 12:21 PM
Hi,
My OPT was approved and I received the approval notice. But the card itself
has been lost in mail. I have applied for a replacement card.
I am aware of something called the "I-9 receipt rule" wherein the receipt for
the replacement of a lost document can be used in place of the document itself
for a period of 90 days.
Does this apply to my case? In other words, can I use the receipt of the replacement
request to work for upto 90 days?
Thanks in advance!
PS: I am aware that I cannot start working based on the approval notice itself.
My OPT was approved and I received the approval notice. But the card itself
has been lost in mail. I have applied for a replacement card.
I am aware of something called the "I-9 receipt rule" wherein the receipt for
the replacement of a lost document can be used in place of the document itself
for a period of 90 days.
Does this apply to my case? In other words, can I use the receipt of the replacement
request to work for upto 90 days?
Thanks in advance!
PS: I am aware that I cannot start working based on the approval notice itself.
hot hair taylor swift our song
GCMATRIX
09-13 04:38 PM
Hello
Please can any body tell me whether there is any mandatory period or rule to stay with your employer after getting GC . When person can leave an employer after getting GC. Experts your comments are valuable for me
Thank you in advance
Please can any body tell me whether there is any mandatory period or rule to stay with your employer after getting GC . When person can leave an employer after getting GC. Experts your comments are valuable for me
Thank you in advance
more...
house Taylor Swift (Deluxe Edition)
va_labor2002
07-06 03:44 PM
Mr.Douglas Montero is a New York Post Reporter. He has published article on immigration matters earlier. He may listen to legal immigration issues.
Douglas Montero's email Id : douglas.montero@nypost.com
If everybody sends an email to him,he may address our issues and publish an article about legal immigration in the Post !
Let's try !
I sent an email to this reporter.
Douglas Montero's email Id : douglas.montero@nypost.com
If everybody sends an email to him,he may address our issues and publish an article about legal immigration in the Post !
Let's try !
I sent an email to this reporter.
tattoo Our Song
mallikonnet
07-19 10:28 PM
I'm trying to beat the July deadline.
Pls. help if you know from where to get the list - for NJ or NY.
thanks
https://egov.uscis.gov/crisgwi/go?action=offices.type&OfficeLocator.office_type=CIV
Pls. help if you know from where to get the list - for NJ or NY.
thanks
https://egov.uscis.gov/crisgwi/go?action=offices.type&OfficeLocator.office_type=CIV
more...
pictures Taylor Swift- Our Song Cover
gimme_GC2006
10-09 08:44 PM
Sometime back there was a thread in IV where people predicted how many applications were processed based on the receipt numbers.
For eg, SRC-XX-XXX-XXXXX
Can anyone point me to the thread which explains what each digit means?
For eg, SRC-XX-XXX-XXXXX
Can anyone point me to the thread which explains what each digit means?
dresses White Horse (Taylor Swift cover-request)
Steve Mitchell
September 24th, 2005, 08:52 PM
Please post a link showing the issue.
more...
makeup taylor swift our song guitar.
Blog Feeds
04-26 11:30 AM
As reported in the Wall Street Journal, a surge in corporate profits is translating into increased hiring for the high tech industry and economic recovery could come faster than anticipated. Notwithstanding the job market showing some signs of life, U.S. unemployment remains at just under 10% and will likely remain high for some years to come. While employers added more than 160,000 jobs in March, the biggest monthly gain in three years, roughly one-third of the growth came from the government's hiring of 48,000 temporary workers for the 2010 Census. So what does this all mean for U.S. employers vis-a-vis...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/h1bvisablog/2010/04/will-economic-recovery-translate-into-increased-h1b-usage.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/h1bvisablog/2010/04/will-economic-recovery-translate-into-increased-h1b-usage.html)
girlfriend Our Song-Taylor Swift Cover
kirupa
07-14 08:28 PM
Ah, clever :) I was about to suggest a hideously complex solution!
hairstyles hairstyles taylor swift our
bushman06
09-29 12:42 PM
With all the data from USCIS, FOIA and other tracker - random sampling its really hard to say. They all say different things. I think the only thing that is somewhat clear is that EB ROW is not going to use much of the visas this year and we expect some reduction in the backlog. There many estimates by people on this forum.
gc_kaavaali
11-29 03:01 PM
Congratulations!!! can u share your PD, category and RD?
got my 485 aproval noice today... whew! after 5 years!
got my 485 aproval noice today... whew! after 5 years!
Blog Feeds
06-01 12:50 AM
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEinSUegbQ1QnUmDix-Vbvue0EV1d3VW152yK1NukAtEDrLfRSAWH1TbYV0vGRWlSNrymVJnbAOCqRNU9SNOWboZewHixPJjHB0tCwoBw4JQWEsZKD8xgT5CY8uNYl7559aTJCTpP1pK5OIE/s200/soccer+cartoon.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEinSUegbQ1QnUmDix-Vbvue0EV1d3VW152yK1NukAtEDrLfRSAWH1TbYV0vGRWlSNrymVJnbAOCqRNU9SNOWboZewHixPJjHB0tCwoBw4JQWEsZKD8xgT5CY8uNYl7559aTJCTpP1pK5OIE/s1600/soccer+cartoon.jpg)
The U.S. Department of State has published an alert (here (http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/pa/pa_3250.html)) for U.S. citizens traveling to or residing in South Africa to safety and security issues related to the FIFA World Cup taking place in nine cities across the country from June 11 to July 11, 2010.
The U.S. Mission to South Africa also has a dedicated World Cup website here. (http://www.sa2010.state.gov/)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-8125950522395613446?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2010/05/department-of-state-issues-travel-alert.html)
The U.S. Department of State has published an alert (here (http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/pa/pa_3250.html)) for U.S. citizens traveling to or residing in South Africa to safety and security issues related to the FIFA World Cup taking place in nine cities across the country from June 11 to July 11, 2010.
The U.S. Mission to South Africa also has a dedicated World Cup website here. (http://www.sa2010.state.gov/)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-8125950522395613446?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2010/05/department-of-state-issues-travel-alert.html)
No comments:
Post a Comment