פרסומים אחרונים במדור "פוליטיקה"

,Banks are corrupt entities by definition
because they thrive on the ignorance of
their customers. Since the "man from the
street" knows next to nothing about basic
economic concepts and managing his own
money - the banks charge him ridiculously
high commissions instead of firing workers
.and becoming more efficient

The ministry of education should perhaps
"consider adding, next to the "ezrachut
studies, a small subject about
capitalism" or "entrepreneurship" which "
will deal not with economic theory, but
with managing your personal finances. Just
imagine what would happen if everybody
knew how much a mortgage should really
cost or what is a "normal" commission for
!buying shares

I agree completely. Actually, "ezrachut"
used to include a section on economics -
workers' rights, some macroeconomy, that
sort of stuff. But during one of the
reforms (I think it was Rubinshtein's),
this section was dropped.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"

The discussion above assumes that Barak really intends to
create a constitution. And what if this move has other goals,
?perhaps more important

Try this: Raising the idea of a constituion is an attempt to
wipe the Likud from the political map and place Shas as
.the second largest party

?Why
Let's suppose that a peace deal with Arafat is at hand. It is
.even possible that this deal will enjoy a big popular support
What will happen to the Likud on the day after the
?ceremony on the white house lawn

It will become completely irrelevant because national
security will no longer be an issue. The "Amcha" will vote
for Shas (unless a miracle in the form of military tension
with Syria will erupt - but how likely is this?). And the poor
Likud will be promptly reduced to a new version of the
historical "Herut" - a home for Ashkenazi revisionists. I am
afraid this is a very small electoral reservoir in Israel
.nowadays

Now the suggestion of a national constitution comes into
:play. It has a double effect
First, it reminds the Shomrey Masoret part of the Likud
.voters that the Likud is at best divided over this subject
Jabotinsky, for example, would probably have loved the
:idea of a liberal constitution! and the conclusion will be
!You want a jewish state? Vote for Shas

This situation will leave Mr. Sharon with no alternative
but to postpone the election in order to prevent the
catastrophic defeat of the Likud. While the Likud backs
the government from either inside or outside, to prevent an
early election - Mr. Barak will gain precious time to conclude
.the peace agreement with Arafat - a second goal achieved

,Barak is very much interested in this process because Shas
even with 30 mandates, will not be able to control the Knesset
nor determine who will be prime-minister, because the
Russians will never cooperate with Shas. The Likud, the only
.serious opponent, will be crashed and Barak will be re-elected

If Mr. Sharon agrees with this scenario, we will hear him in the
,upcoming days as the loudest voice that calls for early election
while Shas will first let Barak finalise the peace agreements,
.then go to election and steal votes from the Likud

Could it be that there is an unholy alliance between Barak and
?Shas to eliminate the Likud
This would explain why both Barak and Shas are encouraging
the formation of wide rifts between religious and secular
jews. And there will be no constitution. Politics, after all, is
.just a cynical game

it simply doesn't make sense.

I did vote for Barak , but I'm
disappointed from his policy (or lack of
policy , to be corrected) too.
But unfortunally we have no choise.
Bibi have shown his capabilities and so
did Sahron (18 years ago).
A lot of people here in the Ayal
mentioned the word "revolution" lately
and I believe this would be the only
way to solve the miserable political
situation in Israel.
Meanwhile , we have no choise but
hoping Barak will be as harmless as he
can.
What I really wanted to say is that
I prefer Barak floating baloons than
Bibi starts the next war.
Or in another words , we're in deep shit.

When you compare between the two
you can't just say Barak is worse. It
depends on what is the base of the
comparison.
For national security considerations I
prefer Barak without a doubt .
Besides, unlike you I don't see Oslo as
a disaster but as the least we could do
for the Palestinians after 30 years of
conquered . Which made them live in
conditions set for cockroaches (maybe).

When coming to social and economic
considerations , I trusted Barak and he
betrayed my faith. On the other hand
I just read this weekend a review
with Bibi in which he said Barak is
humbling the richers and that he
would like to set the maximum tax
precent on 36%-38%.
So , with all the despise i feel for Barak
I can hardly say he can be worse than
Bibi.

I want to offer an emotional, not a
religious criterion for deciding who has
the moral right to live in
.palestine/israel

The criterion is that the side that will
suffer more if he is *not* allowed to live
here, is the one who has the stronger
.moral right for this land

This criterion refers to the strength of
the bond to the land in the present, not
.in the past