Work is insane, there was no reason for a call back of ALL 130 people(not very bright are they)Keep me mad ass busy or I go away. Gave my notice today. lololol..Of course now they want me to train the super coming aboard..Oh joy..NOT!! I know I did this..In the next 60 days I'm starting with a new company, better wages, less miles to drive, even better hours..I can actually get some quality time in with my honey, just as soon as I switch companies..Sigh..NOT soon enough..
We have the Tulip festival going on here for the next week. Freaking stupid ass drivers..15 miles per hour, downtown..They STOP to LOOK at the tulips. Get the fuck out of your vehicle, like the other people walking and enjoy them that way, instead of tying up traffic for hours on end...Sigh..K, off to breakfast we go, 2 hours sleep, oh my, and a beautiful day on his boat...I'll nap in the sun.. lol..all lobster crispy red by the end of the day..OUCH..Still avoiding the down town traffic idiots, especially on a weekend with a festival going on..Much rather RED than pissed off.
Saturday, May 5, 2007
Tuesday, April 3, 2007
Good Ole America McDonalds..What's in the Chix McNuggets you ask?
Most folks assume that a chicken nugget is just a piece of fried chicken, right? Wrong! Did you know, for example, that a McDonald’s Chicken McNugget is 56% corn?
What else is in a McDonald’s Chicken McNugget? Besides corn, and to a lesser extent, chicken, The Omnivore’s Dilemma describes all of the thirty-eight ingredients that make up a McNugget – one of which I’ll bet you’ll never guess. During this part of the book, the author has just ordered a meal from McDonald’s with his family and taken one of the flyers available at McDonald’s called “A Full Serving of Nutrition Facts: Choose the Best Meal for You.”
The ingredients listed in the flyer suggest a lot of thought goes into a nugget, that and a lot of corn. Of the thirty-eight ingredients it takes to make a McNugget, I counted thirteen that can be derived from corn: the corn-fed chicken itself; modified cornstarch (to bind the pulverized chicken meat); mono-, tri-, and diglycerides (emulsifiers, which keep the fats and water from separating); dextrose; lecithin (another emulsifier); chicken broth (to restore some of the flavor that processing leeches out); yellow corn flour and more modified cornstarch (for the batter); cornstarch (a filler); vegetable shortening; partially hydrogenated corn oil; and citric acid as a preservative. A couple of other plants take part in the nugget: There’s some wheat in the batter, and on any given day the hydrogenated oil could come from soybeans, canola, or cotton rather than corn, depending on the market price and availability.
According to the handout, McNuggets also contain several completely synthetic ingredients, quasiedible substances that ultimately come not from a corn or soybean field but form a petroleum refinery or chemical plant. These chemicals are what make modern processed food possible, by keeping the organic materials in them from going bad or looking strange after months in the freezer or on the road. Listed first are the “leavening agents”: sodium aluminum phosphate, mono-calcium phosphate, sodium acid pyrophosphate, and calcium lactate. These are antioxidants added to keep the various animal and vegetable fats involved in a nugget from turning rancid. Then there are “anti-foaming agents” like dimethylpolysiloxene, added to the cooking oil to keep the starches from binding to air molecules, so as to produce foam during the fry. The problem is evidently grave enough to warrant adding a toxic chemical to the food: According to the Handbook of Food Additives, dimethylpolysiloxene is a suspected carcinogen and an established mutagen, tumorigen, and reproductive effector; it’s also flammable. But perhaps the most alarming ingredient in a Chicken McNugget is tertiary butylhydroquinone, or TBHQ, an antioxidant derived from petroleum that is either sprayed directly on the nugget or the inside of the box it comes in to “help preserve freshness.” According to A Consumer’s Dictionary of Food Additives, TBHQ is a form of butane (i.e. lighter fluid) the FDA allows processors to use sparingly in our food: It can comprise no more than 0.02 percent of the oil in a nugget. Which is probably just as well, considering that ingesting a single gram of TBHQ can cause “nausea, vomiting, ringing in the ears, delirium, a sense of suffocation, and collapse.” Ingesting five grams of TBHQ can kill.
There you have it – lighter fluid. But you never thought that was in your chicken McNuggets!
Eat Up America..MickeyD's is selling you the Good Ole American Heart attack! THIS is one of many many reasons One will NEVER see me eat FAST FOOD! It's just a faster way to kill us. Oh that's right, we BUY it..Again, another dumbing down of America.
What else is in a McDonald’s Chicken McNugget? Besides corn, and to a lesser extent, chicken, The Omnivore’s Dilemma describes all of the thirty-eight ingredients that make up a McNugget – one of which I’ll bet you’ll never guess. During this part of the book, the author has just ordered a meal from McDonald’s with his family and taken one of the flyers available at McDonald’s called “A Full Serving of Nutrition Facts: Choose the Best Meal for You.”
The ingredients listed in the flyer suggest a lot of thought goes into a nugget, that and a lot of corn. Of the thirty-eight ingredients it takes to make a McNugget, I counted thirteen that can be derived from corn: the corn-fed chicken itself; modified cornstarch (to bind the pulverized chicken meat); mono-, tri-, and diglycerides (emulsifiers, which keep the fats and water from separating); dextrose; lecithin (another emulsifier); chicken broth (to restore some of the flavor that processing leeches out); yellow corn flour and more modified cornstarch (for the batter); cornstarch (a filler); vegetable shortening; partially hydrogenated corn oil; and citric acid as a preservative. A couple of other plants take part in the nugget: There’s some wheat in the batter, and on any given day the hydrogenated oil could come from soybeans, canola, or cotton rather than corn, depending on the market price and availability.
According to the handout, McNuggets also contain several completely synthetic ingredients, quasiedible substances that ultimately come not from a corn or soybean field but form a petroleum refinery or chemical plant. These chemicals are what make modern processed food possible, by keeping the organic materials in them from going bad or looking strange after months in the freezer or on the road. Listed first are the “leavening agents”: sodium aluminum phosphate, mono-calcium phosphate, sodium acid pyrophosphate, and calcium lactate. These are antioxidants added to keep the various animal and vegetable fats involved in a nugget from turning rancid. Then there are “anti-foaming agents” like dimethylpolysiloxene, added to the cooking oil to keep the starches from binding to air molecules, so as to produce foam during the fry. The problem is evidently grave enough to warrant adding a toxic chemical to the food: According to the Handbook of Food Additives, dimethylpolysiloxene is a suspected carcinogen and an established mutagen, tumorigen, and reproductive effector; it’s also flammable. But perhaps the most alarming ingredient in a Chicken McNugget is tertiary butylhydroquinone, or TBHQ, an antioxidant derived from petroleum that is either sprayed directly on the nugget or the inside of the box it comes in to “help preserve freshness.” According to A Consumer’s Dictionary of Food Additives, TBHQ is a form of butane (i.e. lighter fluid) the FDA allows processors to use sparingly in our food: It can comprise no more than 0.02 percent of the oil in a nugget. Which is probably just as well, considering that ingesting a single gram of TBHQ can cause “nausea, vomiting, ringing in the ears, delirium, a sense of suffocation, and collapse.” Ingesting five grams of TBHQ can kill.
There you have it – lighter fluid. But you never thought that was in your chicken McNuggets!
Eat Up America..MickeyD's is selling you the Good Ole American Heart attack! THIS is one of many many reasons One will NEVER see me eat FAST FOOD! It's just a faster way to kill us. Oh that's right, we BUY it..Again, another dumbing down of America.
Monday, April 2, 2007
Court rules against Bush in global warming case
Mon Apr 2, 5:52 PM ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - In a stinging defeat for the Bush administration, the Supreme Court ruled on Monday that U.S. environmental officials have the power to regulate greenhouse gas emissions that spur global warming.
ADVERTISEMENT
By a 5-4 vote, the nation's highest court told the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider its refusal to regulate carbon dioxide and other emissions from new cars and trucks that contribute to climate change.
The high court ruled that such greenhouse gases from motor vehicles fall within the law's definition of an air pollutant.
The ruling in one of the most important environmental cases to reach the Supreme Court marked the first high court decision in a case involving global warming.
President George W. Bush has opposed mandatory controls on greenhouse gases as harmful to the U.S. economy, and the administration instead has called for voluntary programs.
In 2003, the EPA refused to regulate the emissions, saying it lacked the power to do so. Even if it had the power, the EPA said it would be unwise to do it and would impair Bush's ability to negotiate with developing nations to cut emissions.
The states and environmental groups that brought the lawsuit hailed the ruling.
"As a result of today's landmark ruling, EPA can no longer hide behind the fiction that it lacks any regulatory authority to address the problem of global warming," Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley said.
Greenhouse gases occur naturally and also are emitted by cars, trucks and factories into the atmosphere. They can trap heat close to Earth's surface like the glass walls of a greenhouse.
STEEP RISE
Such emissions have risen steeply in the past century and many scientists see a connection between the rise, an increase in global average temperatures and a related increase in extreme weather, wildfires, melting glaciers and other damage to the environment.
Democrats in Congress predicted the ruling could add pressure on lawmakers to push forward with first-ever caps on carbon dioxide emissions. The United States is the world's biggest emitter of such gases.
The ruling also could make it easier for California and 13 other states to put in place mandatory emission caps, officials in that state said.
Writing for the court majority, Justice
John Paul Stevens said the EPA's decision in 2003 was "arbitrary, capricious or otherwise not in accordance with law."
In sending the case back for further proceedings, Stevens said the EPA could avoid regulation only if it determined that the gases do not contribute to climate change or if it provided a reasonable explanation.
Stevens said the EPA could not avoid its legal obligation by noting the scientific uncertainty surrounding some features of climate change and concluding it would be better not to regulate at this time.
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said of the ruling, "We're going to have to take a look and analyze it and see where we go from there."
The EPA said the administration was committed to reducing greenhouse gases and it was "reviewing the court's decision to determine the appropriate course of action."
The court's four most conservative members -- Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice
Samuel Alito, both Bush appointees, and Justices
Antonin Scalia and
Clarence Thomas -- dissented.
They said the environmental groups and the states lacked the legal right to bring the lawsuit in the first place.
"No matter how important the underlying policy issues at stake, this court has no business substituting its own desired outcome for the reasoned judgment of the responsible agency," Scalia wrote.
(Additional reporting by Chris Baltimore)
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - In a stinging defeat for the Bush administration, the Supreme Court ruled on Monday that U.S. environmental officials have the power to regulate greenhouse gas emissions that spur global warming.
ADVERTISEMENT
By a 5-4 vote, the nation's highest court told the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider its refusal to regulate carbon dioxide and other emissions from new cars and trucks that contribute to climate change.
The high court ruled that such greenhouse gases from motor vehicles fall within the law's definition of an air pollutant.
The ruling in one of the most important environmental cases to reach the Supreme Court marked the first high court decision in a case involving global warming.
President George W. Bush has opposed mandatory controls on greenhouse gases as harmful to the U.S. economy, and the administration instead has called for voluntary programs.
In 2003, the EPA refused to regulate the emissions, saying it lacked the power to do so. Even if it had the power, the EPA said it would be unwise to do it and would impair Bush's ability to negotiate with developing nations to cut emissions.
The states and environmental groups that brought the lawsuit hailed the ruling.
"As a result of today's landmark ruling, EPA can no longer hide behind the fiction that it lacks any regulatory authority to address the problem of global warming," Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley said.
Greenhouse gases occur naturally and also are emitted by cars, trucks and factories into the atmosphere. They can trap heat close to Earth's surface like the glass walls of a greenhouse.
STEEP RISE
Such emissions have risen steeply in the past century and many scientists see a connection between the rise, an increase in global average temperatures and a related increase in extreme weather, wildfires, melting glaciers and other damage to the environment.
Democrats in Congress predicted the ruling could add pressure on lawmakers to push forward with first-ever caps on carbon dioxide emissions. The United States is the world's biggest emitter of such gases.
The ruling also could make it easier for California and 13 other states to put in place mandatory emission caps, officials in that state said.
Writing for the court majority, Justice
John Paul Stevens said the EPA's decision in 2003 was "arbitrary, capricious or otherwise not in accordance with law."
In sending the case back for further proceedings, Stevens said the EPA could avoid regulation only if it determined that the gases do not contribute to climate change or if it provided a reasonable explanation.
Stevens said the EPA could not avoid its legal obligation by noting the scientific uncertainty surrounding some features of climate change and concluding it would be better not to regulate at this time.
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said of the ruling, "We're going to have to take a look and analyze it and see where we go from there."
The EPA said the administration was committed to reducing greenhouse gases and it was "reviewing the court's decision to determine the appropriate course of action."
The court's four most conservative members -- Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice
Samuel Alito, both Bush appointees, and Justices
Antonin Scalia and
Clarence Thomas -- dissented.
They said the environmental groups and the states lacked the legal right to bring the lawsuit in the first place.
"No matter how important the underlying policy issues at stake, this court has no business substituting its own desired outcome for the reasoned judgment of the responsible agency," Scalia wrote.
(Additional reporting by Chris Baltimore)
Living in my own little magical world.
I've come to the conclusion that I'm just bored. So off I go into lala land, my very own little Highland before the Pylon Castle. lol..Eerily soothing. Hey it's my fantasy..
Sunday, April 1, 2007
Dumbing down of America AGAIN..
And it took 1st at the box office this weekend. For the love of God, would people STOP going to these stupid ass movies. It's that Blades of Glory. Who in their right mind would even think of finding this movie amusing?! No, don't tell me, its the stupid people. Yep got that. What's worse is that I rented a couple of movies tonight, one being Children of Men with Clive Owen, which really sucked. Very very slow..I continued to wait for 55 minutes for SOMETHING to come to life, show a stronger side of this storyline, NOPE..Yeah, I'm asking for money back.
I think I'm about to change skins..I'm sooo bored with TV, Computers, Life..Its a rut thing. Just stuck, feed up and bored with generalities of life. Tv is a massive bore these days. Even my favorites Discovery and A&E are killing me. Yes, I know it's just me, eh.
The sadder side:Missing Minnesota boys found dead.Young brothers had been missing since Nov. 22..
The boys were found about a half-mile from where they lived. Authorities have not determined whether foul play was involved, Boelter said...
More at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17905416/
I think I'm about to change skins..I'm sooo bored with TV, Computers, Life..Its a rut thing. Just stuck, feed up and bored with generalities of life. Tv is a massive bore these days. Even my favorites Discovery and A&E are killing me. Yes, I know it's just me, eh.
The sadder side:Missing Minnesota boys found dead.Young brothers had been missing since Nov. 22..
The boys were found about a half-mile from where they lived. Authorities have not determined whether foul play was involved, Boelter said...
More at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17905416/
Saturday, March 31, 2007
Don't like our Ways..
You don't want remove your facial covering for a drivers license? Nor remove it for court proceedings in Detroit, so your case is dismissed unless you abide by the rules governed by the U.S.A. ahhhh, identification...!Your Language is NOT the first language of THIS country! Just as my forefathers came here and LEARNED to speak ENGLISH, PRIOR to even coming, so they would be AMERICANS. You too can Adjust...IT's called respect..Want your language to be #1, GO BACK TO YOUR COUNTRY... Freaking give me a break.APPARENTLY your countries aren't THAT bad, as you wish to abide by your laws from YOUR country, YOUR language, FROM YOUR COUNTRY. GO BACK TO YOUR COUNTRY THEN..STOP SHITTING DOWN OUR GOVERNMENT which allows your to be here, pays your Social Security if you make it that far, supports you(welfare) when your in need. YET YOU wish to shit down OUR throats with YOUR countries ways..GO THE FUCK BACK TO YOUR COUNTRY THEN!! I've really had enough crap..
Scream and yell how we're being unfair TO YOU...LOL..NO I AM NOT A BLEEDING LIBERALIST...You can have your way..Once YOU ABIDE BY THE LAWS OF THE GREAT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA...Any further Questions..? Oh wait, that's right you pretend not to speak out language, thinking you'll get away with all sorts of bullshit, pretend not to understand English..YOU WANTED A BETTER WAY OF LIFE RIGHT? SO YOU CAME TO AGAIN....THE GREAT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, so save your sorry asses. Beat your women, ohhhh no that's no inhuman, YET turn it around onto you, and it's OMG, AGAINST THE LAW..FUKK that..Who the sam hell do you think you are? YOUR not AN HONEST TO GOD, FULL BLOODED UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CITIZEN.. For you don't abide BY OUR LAWS..FUKK in LEAVE THIS COUNTRY.. LET US come back to some sanity of realism, in which through the destructive powers of SOOOOO MANY ILLEGAL ALIENS has been tarnished.
I think that every single building in the U.S.A. should have signs that state THIS"
http://www.GlitterMaker.com/ - Glitter Graphics - MySpace Layouts
http://www.GlitterMaker.com/ - Glitter Graphics - MySpace Layouts
http://www.GlitterMaker.com/ - Glitter Graphics - MySpace Layouts
http://www.GlitterMaker.com/ - Glitter Graphics - MySpace Layouts
Scream and yell how we're being unfair TO YOU...LOL..NO I AM NOT A BLEEDING LIBERALIST...You can have your way..Once YOU ABIDE BY THE LAWS OF THE GREAT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA...Any further Questions..? Oh wait, that's right you pretend not to speak out language, thinking you'll get away with all sorts of bullshit, pretend not to understand English..YOU WANTED A BETTER WAY OF LIFE RIGHT? SO YOU CAME TO AGAIN....THE GREAT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, so save your sorry asses. Beat your women, ohhhh no that's no inhuman, YET turn it around onto you, and it's OMG, AGAINST THE LAW..FUKK that..Who the sam hell do you think you are? YOUR not AN HONEST TO GOD, FULL BLOODED UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CITIZEN.. For you don't abide BY OUR LAWS..FUKK in LEAVE THIS COUNTRY.. LET US come back to some sanity of realism, in which through the destructive powers of SOOOOO MANY ILLEGAL ALIENS has been tarnished.
I think that every single building in the U.S.A. should have signs that state THIS"
http://www.GlitterMaker.com/ - Glitter Graphics - MySpace Layouts
http://www.GlitterMaker.com/ - Glitter Graphics - MySpace Layouts
http://www.GlitterMaker.com/ - Glitter Graphics - MySpace Layouts
http://www.GlitterMaker.com/ - Glitter Graphics - MySpace Layouts
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
The feds need to lower the prime??
HIGHLY cynical this evening with the world in general.
FreeMarketNews.com
The U.S. economy is showing signs of a potentially rapid deceleration. In particular, there is accumulating evidence that the housing sector slowdown may be becoming a meltdown. In many areas house prices are falling. House sales are down nationally, and mortgage delinquencies and foreclosures are rising—especially in the sub-prime market. Is it preventable. Maybe for the moment, in my humble opinion, but eventually, were going to be devastated economically. My belief any way.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2007/03/27/preventing_economic_collapse.php
China has started to drill an 8,875-meter-deep well in southwestern Sichuan Province to explore an untapped underground oil and gas field, sources with Sinopec Corp. said on Saturday..UH HUH. They own a large percentage of US soil, companies, business ventures gone over to them and now their drilling the deepest well for oil and gas..I smell major issues evolving here. Our downfall? See I don't have faith in our government anymore. I so wish I did, yet time has proven they're just not that damned concerned about the citizens of this once great country or the country itself. Do you see them taking 50% cut in pay to help? OH HELL NO...
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2007-03/24/content_835770.htm
Lastly, declining home prices and tightening credit standards will diminish mortgage equity extraction, as is already happening. Since such cash outs have been an important factor supporting robust consumer spending, this augurs weaker future spending.
In addition to lowering interest rates, the Fed must also address two problems calling for deeper policy change. First, Chairman Bernanke’s close identification with inflation targeting has created something of a bind. Though the Fed has no official inflation target, it has allowed market opinion to settle on the idea of an implicit two percent target. With inflation stubbornly stuck above two percent, this means a rate reduction could dent the Fed’s credibility.
This confirms former Chairman Greenspan’s view that inflation targeting would adversely limit the Fed’s flexibility and discretion. The clear implication is that inflation targeting is a bad idea, and the Bernanke Fed should now distance itself from that idea by abandoning chatter about inflation targeting.
A second problem is that a rate reduction could trigger renewed debt-financed asset inflation, which highlights a major dilemma. If the Fed pushes rates too high in its attempt to choke off wider inflationary effects of asset inflation, it risks triggering a credit crunch and defaults as is now happening. Conversely, if it does not push rates high enough it risks triggering accelerated inflation as agents borrow more in anticipation of rising prices. This implies a knife-edge situation, with the economy being held hostage by asset speculation.
One solution is quantitative regulation extending the system of margin requirements to asset classes such as mortgages. This would enable the Fed to vary the cost of those assets without changing interest rates, thereby damping speculation without imposing collateral damage on the rest of economy.
As a graduate student, Chairman Bernanke wrote about how the Great Depression was fostered by a cascade of bank failures that rippled through the financial system. It would be ironic if he were now to preside over his own financial crisis. Moving promptly to lower rates and enacting policy reform that gives the Fed new tools for controlling asset inflation seems a good way to lessen that likelihood.
This article was originally posted on Tuesday 20 March. Paragraph two was amended on Thursday 22 March to take account of the Federal Reserve’s decision to leave interest rates unchanged but to alter its policy statement.
http://www.thomaspalley.com/?p=72#more-72
Dr. Thomas Palley is an economist living in Washington DC. He holds a B.A. degree from Oxford University, and a M.A. degree in International Relations and Ph.D. in Economics, both from Yale University...
FreeMarketNews.com
The U.S. economy is showing signs of a potentially rapid deceleration. In particular, there is accumulating evidence that the housing sector slowdown may be becoming a meltdown. In many areas house prices are falling. House sales are down nationally, and mortgage delinquencies and foreclosures are rising—especially in the sub-prime market. Is it preventable. Maybe for the moment, in my humble opinion, but eventually, were going to be devastated economically. My belief any way.
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2007/03/27/preventing_economic_collapse.php
China has started to drill an 8,875-meter-deep well in southwestern Sichuan Province to explore an untapped underground oil and gas field, sources with Sinopec Corp. said on Saturday..UH HUH. They own a large percentage of US soil, companies, business ventures gone over to them and now their drilling the deepest well for oil and gas..I smell major issues evolving here. Our downfall? See I don't have faith in our government anymore. I so wish I did, yet time has proven they're just not that damned concerned about the citizens of this once great country or the country itself. Do you see them taking 50% cut in pay to help? OH HELL NO...
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2007-03/24/content_835770.htm
Lastly, declining home prices and tightening credit standards will diminish mortgage equity extraction, as is already happening. Since such cash outs have been an important factor supporting robust consumer spending, this augurs weaker future spending.
In addition to lowering interest rates, the Fed must also address two problems calling for deeper policy change. First, Chairman Bernanke’s close identification with inflation targeting has created something of a bind. Though the Fed has no official inflation target, it has allowed market opinion to settle on the idea of an implicit two percent target. With inflation stubbornly stuck above two percent, this means a rate reduction could dent the Fed’s credibility.
This confirms former Chairman Greenspan’s view that inflation targeting would adversely limit the Fed’s flexibility and discretion. The clear implication is that inflation targeting is a bad idea, and the Bernanke Fed should now distance itself from that idea by abandoning chatter about inflation targeting.
A second problem is that a rate reduction could trigger renewed debt-financed asset inflation, which highlights a major dilemma. If the Fed pushes rates too high in its attempt to choke off wider inflationary effects of asset inflation, it risks triggering a credit crunch and defaults as is now happening. Conversely, if it does not push rates high enough it risks triggering accelerated inflation as agents borrow more in anticipation of rising prices. This implies a knife-edge situation, with the economy being held hostage by asset speculation.
One solution is quantitative regulation extending the system of margin requirements to asset classes such as mortgages. This would enable the Fed to vary the cost of those assets without changing interest rates, thereby damping speculation without imposing collateral damage on the rest of economy.
As a graduate student, Chairman Bernanke wrote about how the Great Depression was fostered by a cascade of bank failures that rippled through the financial system. It would be ironic if he were now to preside over his own financial crisis. Moving promptly to lower rates and enacting policy reform that gives the Fed new tools for controlling asset inflation seems a good way to lessen that likelihood.
This article was originally posted on Tuesday 20 March. Paragraph two was amended on Thursday 22 March to take account of the Federal Reserve’s decision to leave interest rates unchanged but to alter its policy statement.
http://www.thomaspalley.com/?p=72#more-72
Dr. Thomas Palley is an economist living in Washington DC. He holds a B.A. degree from Oxford University, and a M.A. degree in International Relations and Ph.D. in Economics, both from Yale University...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
