The 'Ville Voice header image 1

Monday Morning of Ignoring Our Crime Problem

January 4th, 2010 by jake · 9 Comments

Louisville business owners say they want a strong, risk-taking mayor. And I especially love that Jonathan Blue took a swipe at Mayor McCheese. Guess it’s time to send him a thank-you gift for making the local business rag fun for a day. [Business First]

Don’t you love that Insight is going to charge you $3 more for service that only works 50% of the time? I think the increase is to pay for the 8,000 ‘Insight Phone’ mailers they send to every customer each year. [WHAS11]

Crime? Yeah? Still not a problem in Louisville, apparently, despite all the murders. [C-J]

The arena flood wall has been installed. Check it out. [Broken Sidewalk]

What do you love about Louisville? Find out what everybody else loves starting today. [Consuming Louisville]

The teabagger’s shopping blacklist is a great opportunity to figure out where you SHOULD be shopping – everywhere the teabaggers try to avoid. [FatLip]

Do you stand against unsustainable mountaintop removal practices? Then you should protest the practice so you can then be arrested at home much later. [Page One]

We’ve all got that 1937 feeling. [NY Times]

Probably because the aughts sucked hard. Lost decade much? [WaPo]

Don’t worry, though, because nothing will improve any time soon. [Reuters]

Tags: Arena · Business · Crime · Economy · Insight Comm. · Mayor's Race 2010 · Shopping

9 responses so far ↓

  • 1 Mark H (Not Hebert) // Jan 4, 2010 at 10:26 am

    Krugman never say a Federal dollar he didn’t want spent in the name of stimulus. It is obvious that this administration is following the FDR playbook page by page.

    While I agree with him that this “green shoots” garbage is a mirage and not real growth, the current path of government borrowing and spending on unproductive stimulus programs is a recipe for disaster.

    In addition, his assertion that housing boom is not going to return is correct. Unfortunately, he fails to realize that the previous economy was built on that unsustainable false bubble and as such, cannot be achieved again with another artificial insertion of capital. We are just replacing the $11 trillion in false paper wealth with government borrowed wealth.

    Instead of recalibrating our lifestyles to live within our economic means, like we did in the 1970s and 1980s, we are trying to return to the bubble economic levels of the 1990s and 2000s.

    For those who grew up the 1970s and 1980s, it is undeniable that the average family of four lives a far more affluent lifestyle today, than they would have in the 1970s and 1980s.

    In my opinion, Krugman’s, like many in academia, faith in the “green jobs” economic recovery myth and Keynesian government spending stimulus, is only going to create additional obstacles down the road, and will not return the economy to the bubble levels of the past.

  • 2 G-townReader // Jan 4, 2010 at 11:29 am

    Hey! –that Business First article, with Blue’s barb, is FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY – of which I am not one.

  • 3 Jason Puckett // Jan 4, 2010 at 11:35 am

    I guess I’ll be “that guy” and point out the fact the decade isn’t actually up until the end of the this year…

  • 4 Steve Magruder (I, not D or R) // Jan 4, 2010 at 11:47 am

    Mark H, it is merely your opinion that the stimulus is/was “unproductive”. Most of it hasn’t even kicked in yet.

  • 5 Mark H (Not Hebert) // Jan 4, 2010 at 11:54 am

    It stimulated government jobs Steve. They sandbagged the money for the election year and it has only resulted payments to States to keep from having to lay off government employees and teachers. Time will tell if my opinion is correct, but it certainly edging in my favor at this point. Very little if any of the growth has come the private sector.

    While it is true that it’s my opinion, the stimulus, like every one of the government spending programs to date, picks the losers and winners. That isn’t stimulus, its economic and social engineering.

  • 6 Steve Magruder (I, not D or R) // Jan 4, 2010 at 11:59 am

    So, it saved the economy from all-out collapse. That works for me.

  • 7 Steve Magruder (I, not D or R) // Jan 4, 2010 at 12:01 pm

    By the way, even during normal economic times, government programs naturally pick some vendors over other vendors, thus picking winners and losers.

    Your argument is tired and “no count”.

  • 8 Mark H (Not Hebert) // Jan 4, 2010 at 12:13 pm

    So would have writing a $100K check to each American, but at what cost?

    The great thing about prognosticated events that never happened; you can’t be proven wrong. It’s funny how all of their prognostications of what didn’t happen were deemed correct, while all of their predictions have been wrong.

    There is no doubt that huge government spending can stimulate the economy, but at what cost down the road? I guess you have more faith in governmental economic policy than I do.

  • 9 Mark H (Not Hebert) // Jan 4, 2010 at 12:36 pm

    Okay Steve, my argument is “no count.” I’ll trust and count on the government and just wait for my stimulus check.

google

couk