Such a freakin' hypocrite.

The central issue, other than the principle that a nation's citizens and only citizens have the right to decide against policies which are greatly to their disadvantage, is that our current system privatizes the benefits and socializes the costs of out-of-control immigration.

'But what it means in practice is that the Americans, who are displaced in their professional and manufacturing jobs by offshoring and work visas for foreigners, also cannot find work in the unskilled and semi-skilled jobs taken over by illegal immigrants. A free market policy that gives the bird to American labor is not going to win acceptance by the population. Such a policy serves only the owners of capital and its senior managers.'

' The free market economists ignore that a country that offshores its production also offshores its jobs. It becomes dependent on goods and services made in foreign countries, but lacks sufficient export earnings with which to pay for them. A country whose workforce is being reallocated, under pressure of offshoring, to domestic services has nothing to trade for its imports. That is why the US trade deficit has exploded to over $800 billion annually.'

'Free Trade, Open Immigration Dogmas Must Be Rethought' - By Paul Craig Roberts

http://www.vdare.org/roberts/070816_china.htm

'"Employers are very quick to raise the specter of a labor shortage, but often it's another way of saying they can't find the workers they want at the price they're paying.They are unwilling to meet the price signal the market is sending, so they seek help in the form of a spigot like immigration." - " Jared Bernstein, senior economist for the Economic Policy Institute

/developmental or other problems:

DO NOT expect sympathy.

DO NOT expect the public to take care of your 'special needs child' which results (oh, and, BTW. all children are special needs children) and that includes bankrupting the local schools for tuition at private facilities which is nothing but theft from everyone else's kids.

DO NOT take a deduction from your taxes for fertility treatments.

DO NOT demand that health insurance cover this exercise in pathological narcissism either, and for pity's sake

DO NOT have a freakin' litter.

Better still:

Just say no.

“Think of the earth as a living organism that is being attacked by billions of bacteria whose numbers double every forty years. Either the host dies, or the virus dies, or both die.”

...er..DO NOT understand why.

But said that is you must pursue this kind of indulgent fragile ego narcissism don't expect sympathy when the child arrives with serious long term health problems or developmental issues...we evolved to have children young not bear our own GRANDCHILDREN.

'Assisted fertility' is deeply obscene.

"Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell."

- Edward Abbey

I have just subscribed to my first ever RSS feed (broken my maiden as it were) on your (I think you're way cool tech-wise - and I'm Mac from waaaaay back so I don't say that to just anyone) say so.

But....what do I do if I don't like the result?

“It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity.” - Albert Einstein

hahahahahaha

Or take it back to the 'once-in-a-lifetime and over 55 AND must be principle residence'.

The current structure just begs for abuse and is grossly inequitable. Being a home owner should not entitle one to special privileges nor to have one's housing subsidized my renters and the poor.

I'd also index the amount that could be taken tax free to a sliding percentage based on average income for the four or five years preceding. As income rises the tax free portion declines.

It's crazy to treat houses and only houses as this bizarre chimera - half home and half investment. Houses are domiciles, for crying out loud, NOT piggy banks or retirement accounts.

Housing is principally consumption. It produces nothing in the way of tradeable goods and services.

Your house was not appreciating. Your currency was depreciating. It's a forward indicator of a devaluing currency:

"In the United States, when house prices have generally tripled in less than a decade, it is evidence that the value of the dollar has declined by a factor of three in the same time period. Consumer prices have not risen by the same amount because of outsourcing of manufacturing to low-wage economies overseas which also acts as a depressant on domestic wages. Imbalance in the economy appears if wages and earnings have not risen proportional to prices. A homeowner whose house has increased 300% in market price while his income has risen only 30% has not become richer. He has become a victim of uneven inflation. He may enjoy a one-time joyride with cash-out financing with a new mortgage, but his income cannot sustain the new mortgage payments if interest rates rise, and he will lose his home. And interest rates will rise if his income increases, because that is how the Fed defines inflation. Thus when his income rises, the market price of his home will fall, giving him an incentive to walk away from a big mortgage in which he has little equity tie-up. This can become a systemic problem for the mortgage-backed security sector."

February 16, 2006

THE WIZARD OF BUBBLELAND

Part 4: The global money and currency markets

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/HB16Dj01.html