Stiglitz's 'Win-Win-Lose' Scenario

I read this very interesting op-ed in the NY Times a little while ago and I figured I'd share. Joseph Stiglitz, renowned economist and Nobel Prize winner, lays out why he thinks the massive federal spending to purchase toxic assets is a 'win-win-lose' scenario - the loss falling on the taxpayer. The reason I found the article so interesting was because he manages to explain some very complicated and confusing economics in plain and easy to understand language. So for those of you who are confused or intimidated by terms like 'toxic assets' and 'overleveraging' I'd say this article is definitely a good read. 

I promise we'll have some true lol-worthy stuff for your entertainment and edification very soon!

A Quick Laugh (or cry, depending on how you look at it...)

Before I get back into the groove of posting anything of real substance on poLOLitics, I would like to start with something that is completely devoid of any sort of logic or intelligence. United States congressman, John Shimkus* of Illinois, can be seen here, claiming that man-made carbon emissions are not harmful to the environment, but are in fact 'plant food.' Apparently by increasing global warming and levels of pollution we're actually just giving Mother Nature a little boost; kind of like those vitamin boosts you can get at Jamba Juice.

You might notice that I purposefully did not include Mr. Shimkus' party affiliation; this man should not be representing any party of the United States Congress - he should not be a government official period. 

*You may recognize Mr. Shimkus - In May 2007, John Shimkus, during a speech on the floor of the United States House of Representatives, compared the war in Iraq to a baseball game between the St. Louis Cardinals and the Chicago Cubs.