California Dreaming To Destruction

1970 Los Angeles Airport Promo Video

Sarah, Maid of Albion

[...]

…..California in 1970 was booming, it, as a single state was to become the world’s eighth largest economy, it was the home of the Beach Boys, Silicone Valley and the Dream factories, it was where people went to become successful and the successful went to become more so.

Its’ cities were places people wanted to be. Los Angeles, the City of Angels, had only glimpsed the first hint of the escalating homicide, and wider crime, rate which over the following decades would turn it into the crime ridden realm of gangsters it has become.

[...]

But that was 1970, and how things have changed.

In the time it took a girl to grow to womanhood and raise a child to his teens, California changed from a land of dreams to a place which is starting to resemble a nightmare.

In [40] years non-Hispanic whites went from 80% of the population to just 43%, in percentage terms they have been cut all but by half.

Meanwhile, the once golden economy has all but collapsed, it has billions of dollars of debt and the state has now started paying its bills, including some wage bills in IOU’s, which it has very little idea when, or if, it will honour. It is said that, were California a company, it would be declared bankrupt, and even some Left wing papers such as The Guardian have begun to speculate as to whether California will become the first failed US state

So how did this happen? What brought about this total reversal in fortune? How did the state which had everything come to this? Was it a failure of Capitalism? A symptom of excess, or just more evidence of what our friends at the Guardian like to see, and greet with delight, as the inevitable decline of Western civilisation? Or does the answer lie in the first sentence of the paragraph above. Is the answer that a successful 80% white state has become a 57% NON-white basket case because of that staggering demographic change.

2010 GOOD BYE California

Immigration into California, both legal and illegal, has gone out of control over the past four decades. The amazing fact is that of the 100.7 million members of ethnic minorities living in the USA, 21% of them live in California.

Didn’t someone tell us that immigrants were supposed to be good for the economy?

…Full Article

[Via http://elliotlakenews.wordpress.com]

Looks like the government did create a second depression

Watchdog: Bailouts created more risk in system

January 31, 2010 by Daniel Wagner and Alan Zibel

WASHINGTON—The government’s response to the financial meltdown has made it more likely the United States will face a deeper crisis in the future, an independent watchdog at the Treasury Department warned.

The problems that led to the last crisis have not yet been addressed, and in some cases have grown worse, says Neil Barofsky, the special inspector general for the trouble asset relief program, or TARP. The quarterly report to Congress was released Sunday.

“Even if TARP saved our financial system from driving off a cliff back in 2008, absent meaningful reform, we are still driving on the same winding mountain road, but this time in a faster car,” Barofsky wrote.

US economic rescue failing to meet key goals:auditor

January 31, 2010 by AFP

The 700-billion-dollar US government effort to rescue the financial system has failed to meet key goals such as sparking lending and curbing risky activities by banks, a special auditor said Sunday.

The special inspector general for the Troubled Asset Relief Program said in a report to Congress that it is too soon to measure the overall success of the program passed at the height of the financial crisis in October 2008.

The quarterly report said that because of TARP, “there are clear signs that aspects of the financial system are far more stable than they were at the height of the crisis in the fall of 2008.”

But the report also stated that “many of TARP’s stated goals… have simply not been met” and that the potential for a new crisis looms without major reforms.

…

Despite the explicit goal to increase financing to US businesses and consumers, “lending continues to decrease,” said the report from inspector general Neil Barofsky.

It also noted that TARP has failed to live up to the “explicit purpose” stated by Congress of “preserving homeownership and promoting jobs.

“The TARP foreclosure prevention program has only permanently modified a small fraction of eligible mortgages, and unemployment is the highest it has been in a generation,” it said.

[Via http://feltd.wordpress.com]

Downsizing and The Dollar Store

The dollar store is a good example of that creature commonly termed a phenomenon, something of apparent and great import which cries out for explanation. In every city they are popping-up almost like roadside weeds, taking advantage of meagre soil. You may pass them by without regard, but take a careful look and you’ll discover a good deal about the niche they exploit as well as their own remarkable qualities.

I can’t go into a dollar store without being impressed by the sheer productive capacity of industrialism. It’s impossible to overstate the ability of machines to make stuff, stuff of very low price and astonishing variety. Not only this, but there is almost an effortlessness implicit in the cheapness and abundance. Whereas scarcity of goods is the classical economic problem, here there appears to be a casual glut. The goods roll out by the millions in hundreds of factories and are shipped to thousands upon thousands of dollar stores. The numbers! And yet this feat occurs unremarked. The Socialist of an earlier era wrote hymns of praise to the awesome power of machines, but today we are supposed to forget about this power and instead dwell upon the ancient fact of scarcity: not enough jobs for workers, not enough money for social programs, not enough labour productivity to justify wage increases, not enough food to feed the children, etc. Austerity, based on diminishing expectations, is the order of the day. In contrast, the dollar store reminds us that at some point in our history (when?) we attained a technological level sufficient to solve the basic human problem of scarcity. It became possible, for the first time, to lift all people out of a condition of deprivation. There was no longer a technical reason for people to live without food, clothing, and shelter. Utopia, defined as a generalized state of physical well-being, was at this point not only thinkable but practical. There is so much wealth about, in fact, that it’s possible now to dedicate considerable resources to the manufacture of baubles. That, in a sentence, explains the phenomenon of the dollar store.

We’ve established then what a marvellous and unparalleled thing industrial-based capitalism is, so far as productive power is concerned. It’s fashionable to lament the destructive effects of the machine, but really, would you prefer to return to the simple days before penicillin and electricity? Neither would I. There is too much to give up to make giving up a viable option, and anyway we should admit also that we enjoy our mass-produced trinkets as much as the essentials, if not more. Even the notion of essentials has been changed by mass-production. You could hardly extricate yourself from the industrial system, but suppose you could. Historical evidence suggests you’d enjoy pollution-free food and drink – and die at 42, as a result of complications from a common cold. Industrialism, we should remember, was compelling because it emerged amidst the conditions of near-universal poverty and misery.

Needless to say poverty and misery are widespread even today. I’ve praised industrial capitalism’s quantity of production, but what about the quality of distribution? For instance, most of the goods come from China, a low-wage country. William Greider has coined the phrase “job arbitrage,” which means moving jobs from a high wage market to a low wage market, not to eradicate global poverty but indeed to take advantage of it. In the dollar-store universe, North America is significant only as a point of consumption, which is another feature of distribution. We’re told the market arrives at the best of all possible conditions, so don’t worry. But look at those conditions: the market has shuffled things with the result that the North American worker is becoming obsolete and the impoverished ‘developing-nation’ worker is exploited. That much has long been known and discussed, but what about the North American consumer? Will the market render this creature obsolete also? The dollar store is only representative of a universal trend – exportation of capital, goods, jobs, and indeed every other domestic function. Consumption is the only job we’re given in many industries. And you’re replaceable, you know. When the Chinese market is more fully developed, it may turn out to be cheaper and more profitable to sell the goods there as well. If workers can compete so too can consumers. The dollar store at least lowers the standard to the point at which the game becomes possible.

Is the dollar store, then, the cutting edge of an unintended consumer-force downsizing? Surely it trivializes the social roles which attend industrialism. Put the 99-cent Virgin Mary nightlights beside the Utopian-Socialist conception of human potential and you’ve got something which approaches contempt. The dollar store implies you aren’t really worth very much, even as a consumer. ‘Just spend your damn loonie and get out already’: this is what these places convey to me. You’re so close to being not worth the bother, 50-or-so cents away from lumpenprole. One suspects secretly that the store is a diversion to keep us from noticing the entire economy has at last been shipped-off somewhere else. All that remains are the beads and trinkets which have always attended such dealings.  [-June 1998.]

[Via http://waynekspear.wordpress.com]

A Personal Case Study. What Innovation really is.

We Germans are a nation, which mastered recycling (“Less than one per cent of the remaining waste ends up as landfill.”) and others ask for advice. And we certainly export that success as well. Hence, it might not be far fetched to say, that I like to re-use leftovers from our consumer society. And this might be because of the place, the time and how I grew up.

I just used Foursquare today, to show, that I am reading the new print edition of The Economist. Recycling (using) a service for my purpose because I can, and the flexibility given by Foursquare’s design. And I am not aware about any other service that lets me tell ‘I am reading the new print edition of The Economist with a good cup of tea.’ Newspapers and print magazines are at the end of their life-cycle anyway, who would want to develop a service for a scarce activity anyway? Twitter is asking me ‘What’s happening?’ (in 140 characters) or Facebook, but that routine lost already its cool I think. Yes, it has its multipurpose as (intentional) simple platform, but I can’t collect badges, have statistics and so forth.

What I wanted to reinforce with this post, that I used Foursquare for something different, is the thought about innovation. Innovations (and economic growth) are, in reality, many small steps towards the optimization of a current situation. A current business. A current technology. A current idea or theory. There is nothing like the big bang of innovation and something new. Before the modern Internet, there was dial-up. Before the telephone, there was the telegraph. Before nuclear energy (early 1950s), there was the atomic bomb (WWII).  There was already some primitive form there (a use case), and somebody or many had the eureka effect or the need to do it differently or knew somehow how to do it better (a new use case/need). For the business case example; todays Google wasn’t the same Google it was 10 years ago. Todays Microsoft wasn’t the same Microsoft it was 20 years ago. Apple, now the embodiment for mobile devices, design and usability. Tomorrows marijuana might not be used primarily to have a Rausch, but it is already used in some places to help patients cope with chronic pain. Examples extended to politics as well, where California’s direct democracy system (state’s initiative process) will be adopted by the EU through the Lisbon treaty (Sub req).

So, how long do I have to wait for the vertical of Foursquare that asks me ‘What are you doing?’ (Hello Twitter) to collect points, badges, ranks and making a game out of it? Or will Foursquare and Gowalla make a small step forward towards my need and adopt general activities like reading a book or magazine, sport, cycling to work, playing chess or a video game? Redesigning it towards a platform for activities in general (with or without geo-location).

Speaking of convergence and the shortening life-cycle of introduction, adoption, mass-use, and the dying of a service or product which would make an interesting new topic. Or the question whether the current form of democracy in America has reached the point of ineffectiveness or not, and small steps of optimization are necessary unintentional. Two things, technology/SAAS and politics/society, which have a vastly different life-cycle time.

PS: I have not blogged throughout January for some reasons, but I will do my best to find topics for more than 50 words and or just thoughts, links, and illustrations (see my tumblr). Because this here is a very joyous, rich and far reaching exercise for my mind.

[Via http://michaeljung.wordpress.com]

You Really Want To Worry?

Of course you do……living conditions for most Americans leads to worry…..

There is much that we have to worry about….most important is employment…..we always get the “good” news from the tube but sorry to say, there are a few things that need to be pondered.

While surfing I came across an article written by Dan Froomkin of the Huffington Post and he outlined some things that, if you must worry, then these should be the most important:

No. 1: The middle class may never be the same again

The full effects of the crash of 2007-2008 on the lives of regular Americans has yet to be fully appreciated. For most members of the middle class, their sense of financial well-being was largely based on the size of their 401(k)s and their equity as homeowners. After the collapse of stock prices and with the steep drop in home prices, many may never feel the same way again, or spend their money as confidently.

No. 2: The recovery could take a really long time

Even assuming that we are at the beginning of an enduring recovery, there are many signs that it will be a slow one, and that it could be as long as a decade until most American families return to the standard of living they enjoyed before the crash.

Most notably, unemployment is widely expected to be astronomically high for at least another year or two — remaining around 10 percent through 2010.

No. 3: The recovery could only be temporary

For the past decade or so, the growth of the U.S. economy was primarily fueled by the credit and housing bubbles — which now turn out to have been illusory. So what will spur growth this time? Especially with so many Americans out of work? Where’s the demand going to come from?

Citing, among other things, the likelihood that the U.S. savings rate could go markedly higher in the coming years, Nobel laureate economist Joseph Stiglitz warns that “we are not seeing a recovery of sustained consumption,”and says there is a “significant chance” of a double-dip recesssion for that reason.

No. 4:  This time, we don’t have the tools to get out of a recession

The recognized way of dealing with a recession is to lower interest rates in order to stimulate the economy. But the Federal Reserve can’t lower the rate to below zero, so that’s out.

The government can pour vast amounts of money into the economy, either through a stimulus or a massive bailout — or, as the case may be, both.

But next time around, that money might not be there. Not only could the political will be lacking, but there is an upper limit to just how much money the country can borrow and spend at one time without it doing more harm than good.

No. 5: The ‘very serious’ people in Washington are still obsessed about the deficit

In Washington salons and newsrooms, you are not considered a serious person unless you are very, very worried about the deficit. The principle that reducing the deficit is of the greatest urgency (and must come at the cost of entitlements) is for some reason firmly lodged in the halls of power in Washington. An example of just how uncontroversial deficit hawkery is among Washington’s elite was provided by The Washington Post earlier this month when it apparently didn’t think twice about turning over its news columns to an organization funded by Peter G. Peterson, the billionaire investment banker on a crusade to reduce the deficit by looting Social Security.

But deficit hawkery right now is not just ludicrous, it’s dangerous. As New York Times columnist Paul Krugman noted recently, “the calls we’re already hearing for an end to stimulus, for reversing the steps the government and the Federal Reserve took to prop up the economy, will grow even louder.”

No. 6: Whatever is making the stock market go up could go away

The giddiness over the recovering stock market makes it easy to overlook some key questions about its rise. But what exactly has sent the Dow up almost 70 percent since March? Could it be another bubble? And could it burst?

No. 7: The hugely irresponsible financial sector remains unchastened

But the big banks, with their enormous political clout, appear to be managing to duck the re-regulation that seemed inevitable a year ago — and they are now in fact more powerful than ever. The ultimate litmus test is that the banks that are “too big to fail,” rather than being broken up, are now making huge profits — and paying astronomical bonuses — based on the implicit guarantee that the government will pay their debts if they ever face bankruptcy. Indeed, that government backstop gives them every reason to place riskier bets than ever. Even Obama’s latest, much more assertive and populist proposal to limit bank activities does not break up those banks — and faces an uncertain future in our nearly paralyzed legislative branch.

A helluva list and I would agree with him on most of them….there are a wealth of issues to worry about…let the high paid pundits lie to you….IT IS THE ECONOMY. STUPID!

Main Street America does NOT care about all the posturing for political gain…..they want work!

[Via http://lobotero.wordpress.com]

STYLE de los BRIMPOS CANDIDOS...the STORM is sayin': BUTTFRANKLIN TIDES on the SHORE, SARRRR!!

1.) Mighty Mondalo…I tell them to stay on ISLAND and they say…CANNOT, CANNOT! WE KNOW OF THE BRIMPMAN’S ISLAND LEGEND! So i hoist all these INCOMPLETE stories on down a few levels to BRIMP-STORAGE, and compile “BUTTFRANKLIN’S LIST OF ANNOYANCES, GRIEVANCES, FREELANCE MEDITATIONAL ALTITUDE STORAGE, COMPILER OF definitive, slowly moving, glacial INFORMATION TRANS-HOIST in the BUTTFRANKLIN AEON GLOW ROOM.

2.) Smart style…BUTTFRANKLIN knew what he was getting into with this quality MATCHING SILVERWARE AND SUIT-JACKET SET! Marvel as TUBE BOUNCE DYNAMICS come into play, then you are set on “BRIMP-BROIL”!

3.) You jackass. BRIMPMAN isn’t a snack food. BRIMP de SHRIMP is a new dish at the BRIMPMAN BUTTFRANKLIN HOUSE OF LOBSTER with FREE MEAL FOR PEOPLE with ARMS! One only, storewide, no duplicates available. If you are second in line, then (BRIMP)TOUGH!

4.) Paramecial BRIMPMAN will stutter to ya, if not, send $1 for a BRIMPMAN BUTTFRANKLIN CATALOGUE de BUTTFRANKLINESE. INSIDE you will find amazing things, such as BRIMPMAN MOTIVATIONAL CASSETTES(limited quantity), BRIMPMAN BUTTFRANKLIN ZINES with information regarding BRIMPMAN’S TRANSFORMATION de BRIMP! **FOR ANY INTERESTED IN THE BRIMP-MERCHANDISE, PLEASE CONTACT BRIMPMAN AT: CASA DE BRIMP.

5.) STORM into the new age of digital technology with your very own BRIMP-FORMATIVE world of KNOWLEDGE! SEE new things related to the DREAM of COUCHES, STACKS of raddishes and INFORMATION PACKETS, veritable WALLS of some-of-a-kind BRIMPMAN CASSETTES and CD-RS, and of course HANDWRITTEN LETTERS ABOUT HATS AND SHRIMP, written by none other than BRIMPMAN BUTTFRANKLIN.

6.) Feast your eyes on the latest gear…BY SHUTTING UP! BRIMP-STYLE!

7.) You must be aware that BRIMPMAN’S LEATHER COUCH of MYSTERY has ever existed, instead, there has been the GOOFY 70’s SHAG CARPET COUCH complete with TED N*GENT ERA STAINS! THE “COUCHFRANKLIN” model comes complete with extra thumbtacks to hold on the extremely worn upholstery. BRIMP-DE-GOON, YOU GONNA SWOON! NOW IN HD with BRIMPMAN VIDEO CD’S! MARVEL as BRIMPMAN LOOKS AT THE CAMERA, and dares you to think…”THIS IS BORING! BUT COOL!”

8.) SALADE’ DE’ CAPISTRANO, A’LA BRIMPY BRIMP BRIMPFRANKLIN BUTTMAN.

9.) BRIMPMAN’S FINANCIAL ENDEAVHOR’DOUEVERES. BRIMPMAN will salute anyone on camera, BY NAME. FOR ONLY a fee of $5(SHIPPING INCLUDED ON ALL OFFERS), A HAND-MADE VIDEO CD(compatible with computer-dores or hyper-regular DVD PLAYR’S, THIS DISK will not only shock you AS BRIMPMAN takes a defiant turn by kicking a cat toy and then ACTUALLY DOING SOMETHING like kicking the sidewalk OR even doing something like talking maniacally to the camera, then belching INTO THE MICROPHONE! EACH ONE IS DIFFERENT, CONTAINS COOL STUFF ABOUT BRAINS, and absolutely is guaranteed to be 100% BRIMP-TASTIC! AVERAGE VIDEO LENGTH: 56 MINUTES! OF BRIMPMAN BUTTFRANKLINESQUE ART-BRUT POOT-STRACTACULAR ESCAPADES de BRIMP! YOU…MAY…ASK…QUESTION!

[Via http://brimpmanbuttfranklin.wordpress.com]

Senate to Curb Deficit Spending

Lowering it from a buttload to a crapload.  Note the party line vote.  Way to go, GOP — could you at least try to match your actions to your small government words?  Yes, it’s a ploy to stop tax cuts by the Democrats, but you could wield it against them for increased spending.  Not that you guys would.

Anyone else past believing these guys have a shred of honesty.  Or dignity, for that matter…

[Via http://scottrhymer.wordpress.com]

Offline Book "Lending" Costs U.S. Publishers Nearly $1 Trillion

Hot on the heels of the story in Publisher’s Weekly that “publishers could be losing out on as much $3 billion to online book piracy” comes a sudden realization of a much larger threat to the viability of the book industry. Apparently, over 2 billion books were “loaned” last year by a cabal of organizations found in nearly every American city and town. Using the same advanced projective mathematics used in the study cited by Publishers Weekly, Go To Hellman has computed that publishers could be losing sales opportunities totaling over $100 Billion per year, losses which extend back to at least the year 2000. These lost sales dwarf the online piracy reported yesterday, and indeed, even the global book publishing business itself.

From what we’ve been able to piece together, the book “lending” takes place in “libraries”. On entering one of these dens, patrons may view a dazzling array of books, periodicals, even CDs and DVDs, all available to anyone willing to disclose valuable personal information in exchange for a “card”. But there is an ominous silence pervading these ersatz sanctuaries, enforced by the stern demeanor of staff and the glares of other patrons. Although there’s no admission charge and it doesn’t cost anything to borrow a book, there’s always the threat of an onerous overdue bill for the hapless borrower who forgets to continue the cycle of not paying for copyrighted material.

To get to the bottom of this story, Go To Hellman has dispatched its Senior Piracy Analyst (me) to Boston, where a mass meeting of alleged book traffickers is to take place. Over 10,000 are expected at the “ALA Midwinter” event. Even at the Amtrak station in New York City this morning, at the very the heart of the US publishing industry, book trafficking culture was evident, with many travelers brazenly displaying the totebags used to transport printed contraband.

As soon as I got off the train, I was surrounded by even more of this crowd. Calling themselves “Librarians”, they talk about promoting literacy, education, culture and economic development, which are, of course, code words for the use and dispersal of intellectual property. They readily admit to their activities, and rationalize them because they’re perfectly legal in the US, at least for now.

Go to the full article of more of this scathing satirical scribbling!

Go To Hellman: Offline Book “Lending” Costs U.S. Publishers Nearly $1 Trillion.

<< via >>

[Via http://eitherorbored.wordpress.com]

((:S))

I tend to read many books in parallel (not sure what to blame this one on, perhaps I’m just easily distracted…or amused) which is nice because it gives me plenty of ideas to discuss when I don’t really know what to write about.

One of the really fascinating books I’ve been reading is Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein’s “Nudge” (blog here). The book is about behavioral science and how good “choice architecture” can encourage people towards making healthier decisions without restricting their freedom to choose. The first chapter has a section which describes the difference between humans and econs. Econs refer to the perfectly rational beings that traditional economics expects us to be. Econs always make the right choices based on having complete and perfect knowledge as well as the will power to follow through. Humans, on the other hand, are not like this at all.

A few interesting things about humans (also from the first chapter).

1. We are prone to having an unrealistic sense of optimism and overconfidence about our abilities to defy odds.
2. We hate to lose. If winning something feels good, then losing something feels twice as bad.
3. We are biased towards the status quo. Most people stick with the default option(s).
4. The framing of information can have a dramatic effect on our perception. The example the authors use is about an operation. You are told that there is an operation to fix your heart condition and that out of 100 people who receive the operation, 90 patients are alive after 5 years. When it is stated this way, it sounds like a lot of people are surviving the surgery. If they instead tell you the negative statement that 10 patients out of 100 who receive the surgery die, then it sounds like a lot of people are dying because of the surgery. Even though the information is the same, we perceive it differently and that can affect our choices.

I find it fascinating how easily we can (apparently) be influenced/manipulated. This creates an interesting dilemma. If we know that we can influence (most) people with choice architecture, how should we then influence people? Regardless of what is done, there is some sort of effect. Apparently Obama gets advice from the authors. That’s got to count for something.

I’m about halfway through the book now and I highly recommend taking a look if this sort of thing interests you. It also has a lot of interesting ideas regarding policy making and how to manage money. I was originally planning to save this book for the plane but it looks like I’ll be finished it before I leave. A similar book that’s next on my list is Freakonomics (blog here). I love this sort of stuff. Makes me feel smart.

View This Poll

trends

[Via http://linesandpulses.wordpress.com]

The Supreme Court’s Ruling: What Would Milton Friedman Say? Justin Fox

 

The “one and only social responsibility of business,” economist Milton Friedman wrote back in 1970 in a New York Times Magazine essay that launched a thousand arguments, is “to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game …” Friedman contrasted this with the multiple responsibilities that an individual — such as a corporate executive — might have “to his family, his conscience, his feelings of charity, his church, his clubs, his city, his country.”

His point was that CEOs shouldn’t go around imposing their own notions of social responsibility on corporations that were owned by others. Since the only interest that could possibly unite the disparate shareholders of a large corporation was making money, that was what executives should focus on during their working hours.

Now think about this argument in the context of the Supreme Court’s decision (pdf) last week to strike down all restrictions on political spending by corporations. During the oral arguments, Solicitor General Elena Kagan hinted at the Friedmanite line that corporate executives who spent shareholders’ money on political causes might not really be looking out for shareholders’ interests. To which Chief Justice John Roberts retorted:

Isn’t it extraordinarily paternalistic for the government to take the position that shareholders are too stupid to keep track of what their corporations are doing and can’t sell their shares or object in the corporate context if they don’t like it?

Both James Fallows and Felix Salmon (in a blog post with the best headline ever) have made the case that Roberts doesn’t seem to understand how the relationship between corporations and their shareholders really works in these modern times, and that his obliviousness fatally undermines the Court majority’s reasoning. But let’s say Roberts is right, and America’s corporations are all faithfully abiding by Uncle Miltie’s exhortation to focus single-mindedly on looking out for their owners’ interests by making lots of money. Then the argument for imposing restrictions on corporate political activities grows even stronger.

The individuals who make up the electorate in the United States are, as Friedman described, beings of many facets — their actions and their views shaped by pecuniary self interest but also by values, beliefs, and loyalties that might conflict with that self interest. The ideal for-profit corporation, on the other hand, is out to do nothing but make as much money as it can “within the rules of the game.” It is supposed to behave in a fashion that for an individual would probably be described as psychopathic. And if corporations are allowed to play a decisive role in shaping the “rules of the game,” we have effectively put the inmates in control of the asylum.

This feels like a pretty compelling justification for treating corporations differently from individuals in the political process. And there is of course a long tradition of treating them differently. We don’t give corporations the vote, and for generations states and the federal government have tried to restrict campaign spending by corporations. Because corporations are made up of individuals, it can of course be awfully hard to draw the dividing line between corporate and individual activity. Justice Anthony Kennedy dwells on this in his majority opinion in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. He dwells even more on the inconsistency involved in banning some political speech (campaign spending) by corporations when we would never consider banning corporate-owned newspapers from endorsing candidates, Keith Olbermann from calling some Republican the “Worst Person in the World,” or Fox News talking head after Fox News talking head from referring incessantly to “the far-left policies of Barack Obama.”

Consistency is of course the hobgoblin of little minds (adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines). We probably want our judges to be little statesman — not brilliantly imaginative rulebreakers. Legal opinions are supposed to be consistent with precedent and the law. In this case, though, the Supreme Court was dealing with three different and conflicting strands of law and precedent: (1) the many laws and past court rulings restricting corporate political involvement, (2) the precedent that political spending is equivalent to First-Amendment-protected speech, (3) laws and precedent that establish corporations as persons.

The Court majority chose to jettison (1) and stick with (2) and (3). I’m in no position to say the justices were wrong as matter of law. But as a matter of policy and common sense, it’s clearly (3) that’s most problematic. If corporations are persons, they are — if they behave as Milton Friedman wanted them to — persons with mental and emotional impairments so severe that any decent judge would feel entirely justified in declaring them incompetent.

[Via http://steveneidman.com]

Hayek v. Keynes

From NPR:

A rap video made by George Mason University economist and Planet Money friend, Russ Roberts, and Spike TV executive producer and self described “amateur economic junkie,” John Papola, is making it’s worldwide debut today on All Things Considered with a little help from Alex Blumberg. As Roberts and Papola describe it:

In Fear the Boom and Bust, John Maynard Keynes and F. A. Hayek, two of the great economists of the 20th century, come back to life to attend an economics conference on the economic crisis. Before the conference begins, and at the insistence of Lord Keynes, they go out for a night on the town and sing about why there’s a “boom and bust” cycle in modern economies and good reason to fear it.

[Via http://psgsousf.wordpress.com]

I love the '00s!

Admittedly, summing up the past decade in world historical terms is hard, but even with a generous handicap John Gray does a bad job of it. He complains that the two biggest fiascos of the last ten years–imperial overreach in Iraq and the failure to prevent worldwide economic collapse–were based on delusions: respectively, that democracy would magically take root in Iraq and that financial markets would magically regulate themselves. That’s hard to argue with, and anyone with a newspaper would admit as much. Indeed, the more honest among the responsible parties already have. The problem is that’s basically just a statement of fact, and not really an analysis of the failure. That They got things wrong is obvious; we want to know what and why precisely.

Gray does have something of an answer, but it’s pretty facile. It obscures more than it clarifies.

It is not often that large scale crises are due to intellectual error, but a single erroneous belief runs through all of the successive delusions of the past decade. With few exceptions, both right and left seem to think that history is a directional process whose end point–after many unfortunate detours–will be the worldwide duplication of people very like themselves.

This is the kind of sweeping statement that soothsayers specialize in. It rolls nicely off the tongue but the clarity it provides is only momentary and ultimately illusory. Having been riled up by a catalog of failures, we are eager to be told that there’s a single root to the manifold evil. As with fortune-tellers, the problem is not so much that the answer is demonstrably wrong as that it’s almost vacuous but in a way that’s suggestive of some misleading illusions.

Let’s take apart Gray’s statement bit by bit.

“It is not often that large-scale crises are due to intellectual error…” Taken literally, Gray can’t be serious. Historians of both World Wars will be shocked! Show me large-scale crisis and I’ll show you intellectual error.  In fact, show me any crisis at all, and dollars-to-doughnuts I can show you intellectual error. Of course, Gray probably means just that large-scale crises are not often due to intellectual error alone. That’s true, and unfortunately for Gray it’s also true of the crises in question. In Washington, in Baghdad, and on Wall Street, there was certainly more than just intellectual error involved. Worse, Gray’s statement encourages us to focus on the intellectual errors to the exclusion of the others.

“…but a single erroneous belief runs through all of the successive delusions of the past decade.” This makes it sound as if all the various delusions have the same one underlying cause–dig it out and you’ll rectify everything in one fell swoop. Literally, of course, the statement is much weaker. It just says that all the delusions incorporate a single erroneous belief. But that belief might play only minor role in bringing about the delusions, or indeed no role at all. Even if Gray succeeds in isolating a common thread among the delusions, it may not be a very interesting or important discovery.

“With few exceptions, both right and left seem to think that history is a directional process whose end point–after many unfortunate detours–will be the worldwide duplication of people very like themselves.” Look, people have theories about how the world works. Those theories are often wrong, and people are often way to confident in their (usually wrong) theories. So there are two questions: “what’s wrong with the theory?” and “why are people so unduly confident in it?”. The important thing to notice is that Gray’s answer focuses entirely on the second question, the question about overconfidence, when in fact it’s the first question, the question about substantive theory, that is arguably more important. By doing so, Gray actually understates the extent of the errors involved. It’s not just that Bush, Greenspan, et al. were too confident in their own ability to discern the correct theory. They also just had the wrong theories, and even about the people who were like them!  Moreover, this was often for reasons, like incompetence and a preoccupation with bureaucratic power struggles, only tangentially related to overconfidence.

This confusion leads Gray to end on unproductively pessimistic note:

Unreality is the defining features of the ideas that have been in vogue over the past decade. The grandiose delusions with which the new century began have not been abandoned. Instead, they have been shrunk to a size at which they can still be maintained. The small world of British politics provides many examples of this tendency. Rather than acknowledge that neoliberalism has failed, politicians in all three main parties are seizing on a succession of intellectual gimmicks for solutions to the problems that the ideology has created. Gladwell’s blink, Sunstein and Thaler’s nudge, the wisdom of the crowds–these and other ephemera of the airport bookstore are being taken up, promoted and then forgotten in the floundering attempt to deal with a crisis that is only in its early stages. [my emphasis]

So politicians, it seems, are doing precisely what they should be doing: shrinking and modifying their commitment to capitalism in light of its past failures. Indeed, this seems to be the lesson Gray himself draws from the rise of Chinese capital: in the future there will be many different varieties of capitalism including distinctively non-western ones. To be charitable, the social science popularized in the airport bookstore arguably contains important lessons about what a reformed (Western) capitalism will look like. You can argue that the politicians are going about this reform all wrong, but accepting that there are other kinds of capitalism is no reason for abandoning the reform of your own.

[Via http://axepenbell.com]

Syn CDO Casino (Sin City Casino)

Some thoughts on synthetic CDOs and risk pricing of those selling credit default swaps.

Many people have written about the ‘correlation risk’, of CDS sellers, that is, the risk that defaults on basis securities are correlated. Real insurance is based on the expectation that the insured are not going to experience a catastrophic event simultaneously. But the CDS market had two kinds of insured parties: ‘Hedgers’, who own the basis security, and ‘Gamblers’, who do not.

It would be downright foolish for someone selling CDSs to price them the same for hedgers and gamblers. Even the purchase of CDSs by hedgers should decrease confidence in the underlying security, as the risker the security the more likely the need to hedge. However, the buyers have no reason to hope for default, and one can even imagine a highly risk averse investor buying CDSs on low risk securities; the premiums ought to be very small, after all.

A gambler wanting to buy a CDS on a security, however, ought to set off red flags. Their only interest is in seeing a default. That means that they believe the seller is underpricing the CDS. And not by a little, otherwise they would be in a lower risk game than buying CDSs.

[Via http://classstruggle2009.wordpress.com]

Obama seems to be doubling down on health care yet has no Plan-B agenda, only hyped-up rhetoric

 

Obama Doubles Down

Jennifer Rubin – 01.23.2010 – 11:33 AM

This report on Obama’s trip to Ohio is telling for several reasons.  Both the president’s rhetoric and the mainstream media’s coverage should alarm Democrats who need to figure out how to plug the leak in their political boat.

First, he seems to be doubling down on health care:

“I am not going to walk away just because it’s hard,” Obama said before a cheering crowd in a field house at Lorain County Community College.  “We’re going to keep on working to get this done with Democrats, I hope also Republicans — anyone who is willing to step up.  Because I am not going to watch more people get crushed by costs, or denied the care they need by insurance company bureaucrats, or partisan politics, or special-interest power in Washington.”

Is he serious?   One wonders if he is going to pull this at the State of the Union, leaving his own congressional allies slack-jawed.   There isn’t support there for this hooey and no one thinks that “special-interest power” is killing ObamaCare.   Voters are — in large part because of the special-interest deal-making.

Second, it is rather obvious that he has no Plan-B agenda, only hyped-up rhetoric. (”Obama offered no new programs during his prepared remarks or in answers to audience questions, but the urgency of his job-creation message was striking.”) As a practical matter this makes it hard to “pivot” to something else.

Third, his new-found populism doesn’t even sell with the mainstream media:

The president continued the combative tone he has struck with Wall Street in recent weeks.  He said about the tax he has proposed for large banks that are making huge profits and paying big bonuses just a year after being saved by government bailouts: “We want our money back.”   He did not mention that the biggest banks had paid back their bailout money, often with the government reaping a profit, although that has not been the case with the large insurer AIG or the auto companies.

It’s not a good sign if once friendly reporters are rolling their eyes and pointing out the silliness — and dishonesty — of your latest gambit.   Again, what is lacking is real substance, a coherent policy approach. Obama seems to think that the answer to a policy debacle and epic political defeat is not better policy, but a bevy of distractions and half-baked ideas.   Unfortunately for him, not even the Washington Post is buying it.

And finally, Obama’s infatuation with big government and his condescension toward average Americans know no limits.  It’s breath-taking really:

“Obama also shot back at political opponents who say that he is presiding over a massive increase in the size of government.  ‘What kind of big government are we trying to perpetrate?’ Obama asked rhetorically.  ‘People need help. We need to provide them a helping hand.’”

There is no recognition by Obama that voters are screaming for less government, don’t want statist solutions, and are capable of managing their lives by themselves if government would stop pursuing policies antithetical to job growth and economic recovery.   Obama’s retort is always the same: the voters are children, government is here to help!

For Democrats this is a bit of a horror show.   They’ve gotten thumped and the president is floundering both on the rhetoric and on the substance. Saner heads perhaps will prevail. Maybe some experienced lawmakers or outside political-triage gurus will step forward to provide guidance. If not it will be a very, very bad year for the Obami.

[Via http://cliftonchadwick.wordpress.com]

Fear versus Greed

Alas, the fight is not over yet! Throughout 2009, the markets went on a torrid pace, recovering 50% or more from the March 2009 lows. The greedy smiled and claimed victory as economic data began to improve, or rather, deteriorate less. But this last week showed that Fear is still alive and kicking!! With Bernanke’s second term in doubt and China pressing ever so lightly on the brakes of economic growth, investors reacted as they would while driving in a light drizzle….cautious and at a much slower speed. 

What happened? Well, fear is driven by risk and risk is driven by uncertainty. The Republican victory in Massachusetts was a surprise to many and the passing of the Healthcare bill is now a major challenge for the Obama Administration. It’s not like they had a clear path to success in the first place but now, the task looks daunting. 

As for China, if they slow down from their 10%+ growth and they are the main driver of global demand at the moment, what will be the impact on other economies and their equity and fixed income markets? 

Your guess is as good as mine! Hence the uncertainty that increases risk, generates fear, and causes investors to flock to safety. We were due for a pullback! Now what?

[Via http://arturoneto.wordpress.com]

Populist Attack on the Banks

As bad a money manager as banks are – and they are TERRIBLE money managers – EVEN they know that if you can borrow money from the Federal Reserve at ZERO interest, and invest in government paper at 2% or 3% with ZERO risk, you can make a lot more money than loaning money with risk!

Guess who set up that system? Yep! The Obama administration!

I don’t blame the banks for using the very system the administration devised…I would do it in a New York second!

Of course I’m shocked that the market is responding negatively to the nasty attitude of President Obama.

Our President comes from the “Whip that mule” School of Politics. He has gone populist to change the political climate, hoping that people hate the banks and Wall Street more than they hate his ObamaCare, Cap and Tax, Immigration, etc.

It is a risky policy. As much as people appear to hate the banks and Wall Street, their 401(k) is in there, and EVEN liberals (or at least some liberals) understand the inadvisability of trying to get banks to do his bidding by punishing them.

Obama’s base already hates the banks, and already loves him. (Although his “Messiahship” is slipping fast.) Efforts to move the independents with populism is a losing bet…independents are a smarter group than his base.

The “Chicago” is showing through.

[Via http://usna1957.wordpress.com]

A Bridge From Left to Right: Political Indignation of Big Banking

With the record profits pouring in this week (today by Goldman Sachs) the exposure, reigning in, and any warranted prosecution should certainly be a topic that the most partisan on both the left and right can agree to.

If you are too big, FAIL – THAT is “capitalism”.  Being on the left (and not a believer in “the markets”), I appreciate that the President has recently been talking about going after them, however thus far, and certainly Bush before him, politicians have been sucking at their teat!

This “leftist” will meet a “bagger” in the middle on this one.

[Via http://ameriviking.wordpress.com]

Boston Tea Party: Massachusetts voters tell Democrats to shelve ObamaCare

Massachusetts voters tell Democrats to shelve ObamaCare.

‘It is to me a new and consolatory proof that wherever the people are well-informed they can be trusted with their own government; that whenever things get so far wrong as to attract their notice, they may be relied on to set them to rights.”

—Thomas Jefferson to Richard Price, January 8, 1789.

 Two hundred and twenty-one years later, the sage of Monticello has been proven right again. Aroused and well-informed by a year of watching a liberal majority go very far wrong, Massachusetts voters handed a Senate seat held by Ted Kennedy for 47 years to Republican Scott Brown, a little known state senator from Wrenthem.

Daniel Henninger discusses what Scott Brown’s victory means for Democrats.

The resounding five-point victory in one of America’s most liberal states is an upset heard ’round Washington—and one that ought to force Democrats to rethink their entire agenda, national health care in particular. Despite an 11th-hour intervention by President Obama in a state he carried with ease only 14 months ago, state Attorney General Martha Coakley was routed even in such unlikely tea-party outposts as Andover (58%) and amid a large turnout for a midwinter special election.

***

Democratic delusionists are already attributing Mrs. Coakley’s defeat solely to her weaknesses as a candidate, and those were real enough (Curt Schilling, “Yankee fan”). But the last time the Bay State elected a Republican to the Senate was 1972, and a mere 15% of state voters now belong to the GOP. Mr. Brown won because moderates and independents swarmed to him, and because he had the wit and nerve to make the race a referendum on Democratic policies in Washington.

Associated PressScott Brown

The White House insists that the election had nothing to do with health care.   But Mr. Brown ran explicitly on a promise to be the 41st Senator against ObamaCare. “I can stop it,” he declared in one debate.

Massachusetts passed a prototype of the Obama plan in 2006, and residents have since watched as their insurance premiums have risen to the highest in the nation, budget costs have soared, and bureaucrats are planning far more draconian regulation of medical practice.   Mr. Brown accurately said the national sequel would be too expensive and reduce the quality of care, and that it would be a “raw deal” forcing Massachusetts taxpayers to subsidize all other states.

It’s telling, too, that at his rally for Mrs. Coakley on Sunday, Mr. Obama mentioned health care only by implication.   The Commander in Chief did find time to deride Mr. Brown’s pickup truck—six separate times.   Mrs. Coakley also didn’t mention health care in her final TV ad.   The Democratic Party’s top priority had become such a political albatross that Democrats didn’t dare mention it lest it drive more votes to Mr. Brown.

***

Associated Press

The question now is how Democrats will respond to this historic election rebuke. Only a fleeting supermajority and corrupt logrolling has allowed ObamaCare to advance as far as it has, but many liberals will be tempted to keep telling voters to shut up and learn to like what Democrats give them. “Let’s remove all doubt,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters this week. “We will have health care one way or another.”

Sometimes politicians really are as obtuse as they seem.

One of those Pelosi ways would be to delay certifying the election or seating Mr. Brown, and then rushing a bill to a vote in the next 15 days. But even liberals can’t relish that spectacle of disdain for voters. Another option is to use the budget reconciliation process that would require only 51 Senators. But that would take several more months of committee work and controversy when the White House desperately wants to move on to jobs and its “austerity budget.”

A third bloody-minded option would be for the House to pass the Senate’s Christmas Eve bill, word for word without amendment. 

Liberals might swallow that humiliation, but then again ObamaCare only slipped through the House by an eyelash before Thanksgiving, and the bill keeps getting more unpopular.

Many Members may be curled on the floor in a fetal position now that the GOP has won even in the People’s Republic of Massachusetts.  (We’d love to eavesdrop on the next Blue Dog caucus meeting, or Indiana Senator Evan Bayh’s conversations with his pollster.)   And assuming they’re not paper tigers, Bart Stupak (D., Mich.) and his band of 10 or so pro-life Democrats have said they can’t accept the Senate language on funding abortions.

Even if one of these partisan efforts in brute political force succeeded in passing a bill, the effort would only further enrage the public and lead to an even larger Democratic rout in November.

The sensible alternative would be for Democrats to concede how badly they have misread the mandate of their 2008 victory and the public mood. They were elected to fix the economy and to replace a tapped-out GOP, not to exhume and pass every dead 20th-century liberal dream.

The place to start such a rethinking is on health care, by dumping the House and Senate bills and negotiating one that can attract Republican votes. A de minimis package that fixed some of the cost-drivers embedded in the tax code and added refundable tax credits to help the uninsured wouldn’t be our policy ideal, but it would be better than the vast new entitlement spending, taxation and central planning that is ObamaCare. Mr. Brown (like everyone) says he supports universal coverage, and what an irony it would be if he and other Republicans ultimately voted for a more moderate plan that saved Democrats from their worst ideological obsessions.

More broadly, Mr. Brown’s entire platform was built on change in Washington, and his candidacy tapped into the economic anxiety and political estrangement that voters feel nationwide. The electorate is livid about bailouts, blowout spending and the coming tax increases that Democrats will claim are necessary because of the deficits they have created.

On the economy, Mr. Brown didn’t merely oppose tax increases; he was forthright in proposing across the board tax cuts to spur the economy. One of his ads cited JFK’s supply-side cuts, and Democrats would be wise to heed that message and reconsider their desire to let the Bush tax cuts expire at the end of this year. Cap and tax on energy, easier unionization and higher estate taxes should all be dropped as burdens holding back job creation and the pace of the economic recovery.

***

Yesterday’s vote wasn’t a repudiation of Mr. Obama’s Presidency, or at least it needn’t be. The President remains more popular than his policies, and voters want him to succeed. But they are also telling him he needs to steer a more moderate, less partisan course, returning to the pragmatism and comity that shaped his political rise but have vanished in his first, squandered year.

.

[Via http://cliftonchadwick.wordpress.com]

Will we see another depression this century?

Many believe that our economy is at a point of no return, and that we are heading into another depression. There are even predictions of another civil war in the U.S. due to the current economic situation. That is how negative of an outlook some of us have for the future of the U.S.

Only time will tell how telling such beliefs are. Myself being one that disagrees with these foretellings, I have a different prediction. I believe that people are confusing this certain interest that economists have in the Great Depression today to be something bad. Yes, it is true that economists have shown a great interest in studying the depression recently, but that does not mean what we are experiencing now is anything like the Great Depression. The study of the Great Depression is nothing more than a guide for policymakers to make sure that history does not repeat itself.

What happened during the depression of the 1930’s can be explained by the debt-deflation theory. This theory describes the effects of an unexpected fall in prices due to a decrease in the availability of credit, assuming that most demand prior to that point was created by debt. With this reduction in demand, there was less products and services being purchased, and businesses required less being produced. With this, less people were employed, and even less demand was the result of it, production was cut back by even more, more jobs were lost, and this cycle continued. This sounds like what is happening today, however it just isn’t. The depths of the Great Depression has it’s roots in how the Federal Government and Central Bank chose to react to it.

There are a couple of mistakes made in the 1930’s which helped further the depression. One of these mistakes was that of the Federal Reserve Bank allowing the money supply to fall by 25% from 1929 to 1930, then also allowing the money supply to decline even further each year following that. This continued decline in the money supply was the result of numerous bank failures. Banks during that time were allowed to fail, which in turn worsened the already falling consumption and investment rates (keep in mind that banks have the role of providing funds to those that need it when they need it). As a result, businesses and individuals in need of funds at the time had no access to it.

The Federal Government was also to blame, as they tried their best to maintain a balance budget, rather than save the economy. Though there were a number of programs that went into effect during the Great Depression to help relieve Americans of their struggles, such as public works and farm subsidies, this was accompanied by tax increases. The Revenue Act increased taxes on mostly lower and middle income consumers starting in 1932.  Meanwhile the unemployment rate had just reached 24% that same year.

Today things are definitely different. When our major banks began to face insolvency in 2007, the government did not ignore it. These financial institutions were saved by the well known $800 billion bailout. Though too many people view the bailout as unjust, these very institutions today are providing liquidity to our economy to get it going again. The government had also taken it upon themselves to consider the needs of it’s citizens facing unemployment and smaller incomes with the $787 billion Stimulus Package that addresses everything from tax cuts to job creation. If you would like to track government spending as far as the Stimulus Package goes, you may visit www.recovery.gov . Based on this web site, the Stimulus Package has helped make the following possible:

• 640,329 jobs have been created
• $288 billion will be going to tax cuts, of which $92.8 billion has already been spent
• $275 billion will be going to contracts, grants and loans, of which $69.6 billion has already been spent
• $224 billion will be going to entitlements, of which $97.5 billion has already been spent

To add to this, the Federal Reserve Bank has kept a close eye on the money supply. So much so that they have not hesitated to open their discount window to financial institutions in need starting in 2007. In addition, they have even created new bodies to provide more liquidity to the institutions that need it in the coming days (note that  this is possible due to the dollar becoming a floating currency; one that is not backed by commodity, unlike in 1929 when the dollar was backed by the gold standard and the money supply was limited). These newly created bodies include:

• Term Auction Facility
• Term Security Lending Facility
• Primary Dealer Credit Facility
• Interest on Reserves
• Asset Backed Commercial Paper Money Market Mutual Fund Liquidity Facility
• Commercial Paper Funding Facility
• Money Market Investor Funding Facility

It is true that the cost of living is going up, which include increases in State taxes. Some may argue that these rises in the cost of living will make the increase in government spending meager. So the question now is, will the rising cost of living offset the efforts of the Government and the Central Bank to prevent another depression? This is something I will talk more about in the next post.

[Via http://monicashiwratan.wordpress.com]

Home Office

Home-Office

The ideal home office and childcare arrangement. I’ve never seen this, but I have a fantasy that I would have multifaceted help that could double as a nanny and a secretary…perhaps this could be a reality for someone, but like I said, mere fantasy for me.

The ideal home-office is one away from family noise and from little helping hands. I’ve had the fortunate experience of having tried several locations in our house. At one point I had the office in the baby’s room which worked okay when the baby slept a lot and wasn’t crawling or running around. My husband built me an office outside the house, which ended up being the best room of the house because it was well insulated and quiet. Currently, since the outside office in the transition area for the tail end of our construction project, I am working from the guest room. The guest room allows me hear the kids as they play outside as well as throughout the rest of the house.

Inside Your Ideal Home-Office

Essentials for a home-office include:

1.    Computer

2.    Printer/copier/fax machine hopefully with a scanner.

3.    Filing cabinet and a system to keep it organized.

4.    A good-sized desk that allows you to spread out your work.

5.    Book shelves.

6.    Storage for office supplies

7.    Phone, although many people just use their cell phones now

[Via http://balancedhousehold.wordpress.com]

The Fight For 41

Today decides the nation.

Socialism or Not.

The election in Massachusetts will decide who gets the seat of the late Sen. Edward Kennedy.

The Republican wins, they have 41 seats. Enough to stop the Democrats by filibuster.

Which means the Democrats will Lie, Cheat, Steal, and say anything to preserve it.

Morality today, at least from the Democrats has the day off.

And if the Republican, Scott Brown, wins as previous noted the Democrats will try to cram Health Care down before he is sworn in by hook or by Crook.

As this Headline on the Liberal blog site  Salon.com illustrates:

Pelosi: “We will have healthcare — one way or another”

“Let’s remove all doubt, we will have healthcare one way or another,” Pelosi said during an event in San Francisco on Monday. “Certainly the dynamic would change depending on what happens in Massachusetts. Just the question about how we would proceed. But it doesn’t mean we won’t have a health care bill.”

There is one way to pass the bill, even without 60 votes in the Senate, that’s getting a lot of attention now. But Pelosi probably won’t like it, and neither will a fair amount of her members.

The procedure in question would involve simply having the House vote on the bill that the Senate has already passed. That would mean avoiding yet another cloture vote in the Senate, one Democrats would be likely to lose if their caucus is down to 59 members after the special election in Massachusetts on Tuesday.

House liberals will be upset about this idea, and progressive activists would likely be angry as well, but it may well be the only option left, and Democrats are reportedly leaning towards it. On Monday night, the New York Times reported: “The White House and Democratic Congressional leaders, scrambling for a backup plan to rescue their health care legislation if Republicans win the special election in Massachusetts on Tuesday, are preparing to ask House Democrats to approve the Senate version of the bill, which would send the measure directly to President Obama for his signature.”

Remember when this was alledgedly for the good of the American people?

I never thought so. But remember when that was what was said?

Apparently, neither did they.

Democrats are mobilized by the prospect of conceding a Senate seat in a state where they control all 10 House seats. President Barack Obama stumped for Coakley in a trip to Boston Sunday. He also cut a new television ad, while his grassroots organizing group says it placed 93,000 (robo)calls across the state on Jan. 16 alone.

“In some ways, Republicans have already won,” said Jennifer Duffy, the Senate analyst for the nonpartisan Cook Political Report in Washington. “Nobody ever imagined a special election in Massachusetts for Ted Kennedy’s seat would ever get remotely competitive.”

Research “strongly suggests” that Brown, 50, will defeat Coakley, 56, the Washington-based nonpartisan Rothenberg Political Report said. That outcome or even a narrow Coakley win could discourage House or Senate Democrats in competitive districts and states from running in this November’s elections amid a sagging economy and declining poll numbers for Obama.(salon.com)

Democrats could try a strong-arm tactic, such as rushing to hold a final Senate vote before Brown is sworn in, knowing it would ignite a ferocious public outcry.

If Brown wins, health care’s fate will turn on the Democrats’ answer to a wrenching question: Which is worse, enduring such a firestorm of criticism at the start of an election year, or admitting defeat on their top agenda item despite controlling the House, Senate and White House?

“I think Democrats fully understand they have to pass this legislation,” said Ron Pollack, head of the Families USA advocacy group. “The alternative is an absolute disaster.”

“Put the corn where the hogs can get it,” (Former President Bill Clinton on “educating the public to the benefits of the Congress’ plan) Clinton said, using a colorful phrase for making something clear and accessible, according to an aide who took notes at the speech. (Washington Post)

Anyone for Revenge of The Hogs?

If he wins, and I pray he does, the Democrats might actually discover who the American People are again.

And won’t that be a shock to their little minds.

Obama warned that much of his agenda in Congress, specifically his health-care overhaul and proposed fee on big banks, hinges on retaining Kennedy’s former seat.

“We’ve begun to deliver on the change you voted for,” Obama told a crowd of about 1,500 people Jan. 17 at Northeastern University in Boston.

This would be massive spending, pork & bribes, special deals for apparatchiks, no emphasis on job creation, and a year-long super-duper hyper-partisan fight over control of who lives and who dies that has been nastier than any fight since The Civil War.

The Government Mandating by law you must have insurance or potentially go to Jail.

And the massive taxes to come with it.

Yeah, that’s what people voted for.

So let’s all pray for the Brown Miracle.

We Need “Hope & Change!”

“Yes We Can!”

[Via http://indyfromaz.wordpress.com]

Radiojamaica.com... today's news... today | Air, Jamaica, Union, Valentine, Workers | PM to meet with unions on Air J - Following howls of protests about the proposed...

Following howls of protests about the proposed sale of Air Jamaica, Prime Minister Bruce Golding is to meet with trade union leaders Monday to give them a status report on the impending sale of the national airline to Trinidad and Tobago’s Caribbean Airlines.

via Radiojamaica.com… today’s news… today | Air, Jamaica, Union, Valentine, Workers | PM to meet with unions on Air J – Following howls of protests about the proposed….

Why on earth does there have to be a conflagration before the PM smells what is cooking?? I don’t want to be overly critical about every policy decision that he makes, because indeed he has a rough course to manoeuvre to get us back on the road to any real and sustainable sort of success. I honestly don’t envy his lot, but at the same time, he has decided to against all odds to attain his current position  and therefore should perform in such a way that cultivates confidence in his competence.

The gross lack of transparency, secretive ways of governance and very misguided modes of thinking do not provide for me much reason to trust in his ability to adequately govern my nation. He might be competent but for right now, him nuh ready yet!

[Via http://thinkingjamaica.wordpress.com]

The Economic Consequences of Peace in the Cod Wars

“The best books … are those that tell you what you know already”, wrote George Orwell in 1984. While, pace the likes of Henry Porter, our country isn’t Orwellian, there is a lot of truth in this line. And so it was when I read Martin Wolf on Iceland last week. He powerfully and intelligently argues for that which I have always instinctively felt about events there.

The British and Dutch governments are seeking agreement with the Icelandic government for the repayment of debts, which now amount to 50% of Icelandic GDP, owed to British and Dutch savers in now collapsed Icelandic banks. If we attempt to see things from the Icelandic perspective, this observation from Wolf is particularly striking: “In the UK context, this would be equivalent to a demand for £700bn. It is not hard to imagine how far Mr Brown would get with a suggestion that the UK should accept such a debt to refund depositors in foreign branches of bankrupt UK banks.”

We most probably do not have to fear the rise of Nazism in Iceland, (though, Icelanders do have unnecessary misery and Brits needlessly lost goodwill to fear), but Wolf’s analysis seems as persuasive and prescient as J. M. Keynes’ The Economic Consequences of the Peace proved to be on the Versailles Conference.

“Do Iceland’s taxpayers have a moral obligation to pay this loan? My view is: no. The delusion that finance was the path to riches was propounded by countries that should have known far better. I cannot blame Icelanders for succumbing. I certainly do not want generations of Icelanders to bear the cost.”

Iceland has many things going for it. However, not so many, that more measured approaches from the British and Dutch governments could not considerably improve the prospects of Icelanders for many years to come.

“The final and, in truth, most important question is whether these demands are reasonable. After all, in every civilised country it has long been accepted that there is a limit to the pursuit of any debts. That is why we have introduced limited liability and abolished debtors’ prisons. Asking a people to transfer as much as 50 per cent of GDP, plus interest, via a sustained current account surplus is extraordinarily onerous.”

Not only is it extraordinarily onerous but it is only justified if we accept that several generations or more of Icelanders should pay the full price for the follies of a small Icelandic elite. What would the likes of the Labour Party argue in similar circumstances in the UK? Surely, we’d argue in favour of the many and not the few? So, why should we think any differently about an event in Iceland?

Let’s take a deep breath, step back and extend a modicum of decency to a fundamentally decent people, who, incidentally, were amongst the first to get aid to Haiti this week. If Icelanders can do the right thing by Haiti, Brits can do the right thing by Iceland.

[Via http://jonathantodd.wordpress.com]

ASIAN FINANCE NEWS

Update:

IND Provide credit to women SHGs at 4 pc: President tells RBI: President Pratibha Patil on Saturday asked th.. bit.ly/8X9T3e #

IND Marginal rise in RIIL Q3 net: The Mukesh Ambani Group firm Reliance Industrial Infrastructure said its n.. bit.ly/8f2Cnr #

IND Gold gains on seasonal demand : Gold prices gained Rs 60 to Rs 17,090 per ten gram here on retail buying.. bit.ly/5fm50F #

New RSS feed:XDN "O India". Bollywood and other Indian culture items. just started. ow.ly/X6Ye #

IND Orissa to seek public opinion on Posco project: Orissa govt today decided to seek public opinion on Posc.. bit.ly/5P8oYA #

IND Nano bags ‘car of the year’ award: Small car Nano, manufactured by the Tata Group, has won Autocar India.. bit.ly/6OSSWQ #

Vision Tech International buys majority stake in Shanghai cemetery: Vision Tech International has bought a majo.. bit.ly/6faQkh #

Marginal rise in RIIL Q3 net: MUMBAI: The Mukesh Ambani Group firm Reliance Industrial Infrastructure said its .. bit.ly/6fk9h6 #

Gold gains on seasonal demand: NEW DELHI: Gold prices gained Rs 60 to Rs 17,090 per ten gram here on retail buy.. bit.ly/7q9bmb #

IND Anil Ambani plans to take over MGM Hollywood studio: Report: ADAG chairman Anil Ambani plans a takeover .. bit.ly/526lOj #

IND Maruti hikes prices of most models: The country’s largest car maker Maruti Suzuki India today hiked pric.. bit.ly/4qFgGJ #

Orissa to seek public opinion for Posco project: BHUBANESWAR: Orissa government today decided to seek public op.. bit.ly/5BpyZd #

Tata's Nano bags 'car of the year' award: MUMBAI: Small car Nano, manufactured by the Tata Group.. bit.ly/79rYd0 #

Toyota to ramp up Fortuner's capacity: Toyota Kirloskar Motor today said it would ramp up the assembling c.. bit.ly/6SBNue #

Maruti Suzuki hikes prices of most models: NEW DELHI: The country's largest car maker Maruti Suzuki India .. bit.ly/7K5aho #

Fresh blow to Karzai’s cabinet: Afghanistan’s parliament dealt President Hamid Karzai a fresh rebuff by rejecting … bit.ly/8Nczt8 #

Woman to be RBI top brass soon, hopes Pranab: As the central government prepares for the annual budget on Febru.. bit.ly/6D2sQg #

RBI Governor meets FM ahead of monetary review: As the central government prepares for the annual budget on Feb.. bit.ly/5UPVzo #

Now Maruti cars to cost you more: The country's largest passenger car manufacturer Maruti Suzuki India Ltd.. bit.ly/7akBpB #

UN appeals for $560m in Haiti aid: The United Nations is making an appeal for $562m to alleviate the catastrophe w… bit.ly/5xKnQb #

UN appeals for $560m in Haiti aid: The United Nations is making an appeal for $562m to alleviate the catastrophe w… bit.ly/5xKnQb #

IND MNC’s chase women to fill top jobs: Multinational companies are chasing fair sex big time to fill top po.. bit.ly/8a1NTn #

All India News RSS, XDN’s O India News RSS 24/7 Try at ow.ly/Xdwp or try Indian Culture ow.ly/Xdwq details: ow.ly/Xdwr #

MNC headhunters chase women to fill top jobs: BANGALORE: Multinational companies are chasing fair sex big time .. bit.ly/6c3qZF #

SBP asks Islamic banks to adopt standards: Sunday, January 17, 2010 By our correspondent KARACHI: The State Ban.. bit.ly/75FVYG #

— to launch housing loans for journalists: Sunday, January 17, 2010 KARACHI: In his first visit to the KPC, NBP.. bit.ly/8hBVZJ #

Go-slow at Port Qasim: Shippers shifting vessels to Karachi Port Sunday, January 17, 2010 By Hina Mahgul Rind K.. bit.ly/7GzsWc #

Wind mills set up in Punjab to generate power: Sunday, January 17, 2010 By Jawwad Rizvi KALLAR KAHAR: A Chinese.. bit.ly/5cQB3p #

Protestors unable to stop Hong Kong rail link: Over 1,000 protesters staged a sit-in outside Hong Kong's L.. bit.ly/4IibZT #

Get business, financial, market, economic news from INDIA in 1 simple RSS feed. XDN’s latest "O India Business News" at ow.ly/XflE #

PAK Turkey to set up 50MW windmills: LAHORE – Punjab Chief Minister Muhammad Shahbaz Sharif has said that the peop… bit.ly/7b9WZF #

PAK Textile policy gets accolades from stakeholders: Ever since the inception of Pakistan, textile industry has be… bit.ly/53YxEA #

PAK Sarkozy visit to boost economic ties with Pak: ISLAMABAD (APP) – Minister of State for Finance and Economic Af… bit.ly/51Vabz #

PAK UK denies copying US bank tax plan: LONDON (AFP) – Britain has ruled out copying the United States by proposin… bit.ly/64NlNY #

PAK Aptma delegation meets Zardari: LAHORE (PPI) – APTMA delegation called on Asif Ali Zardari, President of the I… bit.ly/7TCqe7 #

Mazda, Ford To End Output Partnership In China By 2012- Nikkei: by 2012 in order to allow itself to independent.. bit.ly/5065EP #

Mazda, Ford To End Output Partnership In China By 2012- Nikkei: by 2012 in order to allow itself to independent.. bit.ly/8B5Fnl #

Foreign tourist arrivals in India jump 21pc: The country's largest passenger car manufacturer Maruti Suzuk.. bit.ly/8sDJd9 #

India to provide 30 MW power to Nepal: The country's largest passenger car manufacturer Maruti Suzuki Indi.. bit.ly/8GfPgB #

IND CII advocates incentives to boost savings, investments: The Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) has urged t… bit.ly/8SFwil #

IND Maya cracks the whip on UP sugar mills: The Uttar Pradesh government has lodged complaint against 39 private s… bit.ly/6Zm3fU #

IND Now, pilgrims wing their way to the Mahakumbh: For those who can afford it, the path to the Mahakumbh Mela is … bit.ly/6Ll0LF #

-from a Canadian living in Asia

[Via http://xindai.wordpress.com]

What Your High School Persona Says About You:

A satire on High School High School LabelsWhat Your Self said about YouWho you were in school? Which group were you? Who did you identify? All these things may say, questions the person you are today. For fun, I broke down these groups in a piece of information you learn more about who you are, or were.The nerd NerdThe only grows in popularity over time and do not in itself same until they are done with college and made a success of themselves. The nerd is now rich and warm with a bride sexy mail order. She succumbs to his every whim and you wash his Ferrari from time to time, since you're the pool boy. The nerd is your boss, and you have no more ass you're kicking his ass. The Slacker SlackerThe spent much time thinking about how to get out of classes and an equal amount of time smoking pot.Everything Slacking time meant that this will continue in the college years and what they have left the university to find a better job and spent all their savings in a get rich quick. Broke out, they work at the local dealer used car and spend a considerable amount of time perfecting that Combover. Who knew that a lot of pot would make you impotent? The skank SkankThe literally transforms into a gold digger when she reached the legal age and realizes that she can now make money with it was to release all his years of high school life accounting education. The Goth KidAfter school, nobody really has consulted more about the Goth Kid. " The reason being that the kid "Goth" realized that the cry for independence in the world with makeup and dark clothes made no difference at all, but what makes them both with the rest of the Goth kids.Therefore, the "little Goth" became like everyone else and is fairly normal neighbor.The AthleteThe athlete could follow the path of one or two ways. The athlete could be drafted and play sports college to become a famous athlete or the athlete is injured on May college coaches and sports teams in high school and spoke with anguish of his glory days and talk to someone one who listens to talk. The Cheerleader…

Read full article: What Your High School Persona Says About You:

[Via http://foreduca.wordpress.com]

Former political rivals find common ground

Randy and Phil don’t often agree on much. They have been adversaries in mayoral races and on  myriad issues. But the two men have reached a consensus on working to lure the 2012 Republican National Convention to Phoenix.

The GOP convention “is an economic opportunity for the city, Valley and state — that benefits everyone no matter what the political party,” Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon said this week. “No grudges at all.”

And state Republican Chairman Randy Pullen was equally congenial: “Politically, we don’t agree on very much in terms of issues,” Pullen said. “But for something like this, we clearly understand this is a tremendous opportunity for the city of Phoenix, whether you’re a Democrat or a Republican. There are some things we can agree on,” he added, Scott Wong reports in the daily.

Knowing that the Mayor is term-limited no doubt adds to his palatability.

[Via http://seeingredaz.wordpress.com]

Old Airplanes, Old Pilots, Aunts and Uncles part II

1917 President Woodrow Wilson declared war on Germany mobilizing millions of men and boys to fight a war in a far away place called Germany and France.  Otis was 35 to old for most jobs in the Army, none the less he give Sis keys to the general store they owned in San Angelo, Texas, made out his will and joined the Army.  San Angelo in 1917 was nothing more than a small cow town with a few dirt streets.  Oil had been discovered near by but at that time was not a big or important industry. They lived in an apartment that they had constructed above the store.

He was sent off for 6 weeks training before being shipped to France.  Upon his arrival in France he met an old friend that was able to get Otis a job working on airplanes, far from the front lines.  Within a month or so Otis convinced one of the pilots to teach him to fly.  By his third month in France Otis had become a pilot and was flying reconnaissance missions over enemy lines. Airplanes in those days could not carry bombs and few were fitted with machine guns.  Otis managed to contribute to the battle effort by flying very low over the enemy lines and pitching hand grenades down on the battle field from the open cockpit of his airplane.

During the insuring 18 months, Otis and his flying partner were shot down several times, crash landed more than once and was recognized for their heroics in battle. When not flying much of his time was invested in patching bullet holes in his airplane.  In November 1918 as suddenly as it started WWI came to an end and Otis along with millions of other Americas were shipped home.

Back home operating a general store could no longer keep Otis happy.  He started a search and found an old Army surplus bi-wing airplane for sale. it was the same model he had flown in France so he knew how to repair and fly this piece of flying history. After a year or so of saving, finding repair parts and rebuild it was ready to take to the air once again.  Otis assisted by Sis spent the next 30 years flying 3 days a week employed by Gulf oil company flying gas and oil lines looking for leaks.

Rewind to their arrival at my home, many pounds of fried chicken, potato salad and gallons of ice tea had been consumed.  Women and girls were clearing tables washing and putting away dishes, men had gathered to visit and tell stories, boys were sent away to play and not be under the adults feet.

About 3PM Sis and Otis started saying their good bye’s, ( it took about 5 hours to fly back to San Angelo) quickly checking out their airplane began the task of getting it started and ready to fly.  Sis made her way into the front seat, as Otis stood by it’s propeller ready to spin it to start this beast.  Now I find it amazing the were able to manage this task they were both almost 70 years old.  Sis yelled something out of the cockpit to Otis and within seconds the airplane came to life. Otis climbed into the back seat, as Sis gave it more gas, it began to bounce down our dirt road a  was soon in air. I watched until it was out of site.

That was the last time I saw them, they were both killed in a plane crash in 1960 at age 78 still doing heroic things even to death.  What a life, What an adventure they had!

TGIF  -  Why is Common Sense so Uncommon??

[Via http://pobeptsworld.wordpress.com]

Prachanda proposes the Dengist path for Nepal, typical

Prachanda proposes the Dengist path for Nepal, typical

(monkeysmashesheaven.wordpress.com)

The Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) is a party that emerged out of the now defunct  revisionist cesspool known as the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM). The party waged a people’s war for many years and seized power in much of Nepal. Very abruptly, the leadership called off the people’s war and opted for the dead-end path of bourgeois reformism. They seized defeat from the jaws of victory around 2007. During the people’s war, the party had projected the image of a Maoist organization. However, shortly after the leadership dismantled the people’s war, they began abandoning almost every aspect of Maoism. This ideological turnaround accompanied their dismantling of the people’s institutions countrywide: they reversed much of their land reform, they dismantled many of their institutions of dual power, they disarmed and marched their people’s army into prison camps supervised by the UN. At one point, they even proposed dropping the Maoist label and merging with the mainstream revisionist parties of Nepal. The typical reaction by revisionists on the world scene was either to cower in silence as this betrayal went on or to cheer the betrayal on. Many continue to cheer the blatant revisionism in Nepal. Only the Maoist-Third Worldist movement consistently led the international communist movement in exposing the reversal of the revolution and abandonment of Maoism in Nepal.

Prachanda has made many pronouncements reassuring the imperialists that, despite occasional radical rhetoric for internal consumption, his party is not a threat to the imperialist order. Given Prachanda’s deals with the World Bank and International Monetary Fund and other imperialists, it should be no surprise that Prachanda has proposed adopting a revisionist, Dengist road for Nepal’s development.

“We will build special economic zones like China.. The special economic zones stimulated China’s economic development, and we want to learn from China. China’s experience is really helpful for us.” (1)

Special economic zones (SEZs) are regions that have relaxed economic, environmental and labor laws. SEZs are set up to give free reign to foreign capital to exploit local populations and plunder local resources. SEZs are a key part of the neo-liberal globalization and “shock therapy” forced on Third World countries. SEZs have been setup across the Third World in China, India, the Philippines, Korea, Cambodia, Peru, and other countries. SEZs were part of Deng Xiaoping’s program of reversing socialism in China during the 1980s. It is no wonder that the compradors who run India have recently proposed making Prachanda’s right-hand man and vice chairman of the UCPN(M) Baburam Bhattarai in the position of Prime Minister. (2)

Like Deng, Prachanda sees development, not class struggle as the way forward in Nepal. In other words, the development of productive forces is the principal problem in Nepal, according to Prachanda. This revisionist outlook has a long history in the Communist movement. A version of the Theory of Productive Forces has been held by revisionists such as Trotsky, Liu Shaoqi and Deng Xiaoping. This theory was criticized as thoroughly revisionist by the Maoists during the Chinese Cultural Revolution. This view was always the main view opposing the Maoist line that emphasized class struggle and opposition to imperialism versus the revisionist line of capitulation in the name of development. To embrace the Dengist road is a total rejection of Maoism and the Cultural Revolution. Labels mean nothing. Just because Prachanda’s party still attaches the Maoist suffix to their party name does not mean they are Maoist. Even the revisionist Deng claimed to be a follower of Mao. The fact that so few have come forward to expose this revisionism shows the ideological bankruptcy of the majority of those are who call themselves Maoist.

The opening words of Mao’s Selected Works raise the question of class: Who are our enemies? Who are our friends? Mao called the question of class analysis the question of first importance. If you can’t get the question of class right, then it is unlikely that you’ll get anything else right. Even today, the majority of First Worldist parties, that also claim to be Maoist, cheerlead Prachanda’s revisionism. This shows that organizations that get it wrong on global class are infected with all kinds of other forms of revisionism.

Notes.

1. Nanfang Daily, June 30, 2008.  http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=5029

2. http://www.nepalnews.com/main/index.php/news-archive/2-political/3263-india-is-proposing-to-make-bhattarai-the-prime-minister-maoist-chairman-dahal.html

[Via http://monkeysmashesheaven.wordpress.com]

If ignorance of economics is bliss

Then President Obama must be one of the happiest men on Earth. FOX’s John Stossel reports on the administration’s latest hare-brained scheme, a plan to tax large banks based on their lending activity:

Today President Obama will propose a new tax on the nation’s biggest banks, reports today’s Washington Post. How will the tax work?

Firms would pay a “Financial Crisis Responsibility Fee” at an annual rate of $1,500 for every $1 million borrowed to finance lending and other activities.

In other words, the Obama Administration is going to punish those greedy banks by making it more expensive for you to borrow money. This is wrong on so many levels, it’s hard to know where to begin. Let’s start with a point made by Jamie Dimon, CEO at JP Morgan Chase:

“Using tax policy to punish people is a bad idea…All businesses tend to pass their costs on to customers.”

Exactly. But don’t worry, the Administration thought of that. They have a plan:

But by imposing the tax on only the largest firms, government officials said, they hope to protect consumers. Firms that raised prices would give smaller rivals a competitive advantage, creating an incentive for companies instead to swallow the cost, potentially by reducing employee pay.

Oh, now I see. They will only punish customers of big banks. If I run a small bank, this will now give me an incentive to stay small.  I wonder how that will encourage lending.

Beyond that nonsense is the idea that they’re “constraining the industry’s ability to take large risks and reap outsize rewards”. The only reason that banks reaped “outsize rewards” for taking bad risks is because the government encouraged them to do that by guaranteeing mortgage loans. Risk taking got wild when government protected risk takers from feeling the consequences of a bad risk.

Stossel’s right on the money about the Bizarro-World nature of this policy. But the Democrats are so addicted to government regulation and intervention in the marketplace that they cannot admit that their attempts at social engineering are what caused the problem in the first place. In other words, more cowbell!

It’s another example of how progressives treat taxes as a static factor that doesn’t affect anything around it, rather than as a dynamic factor with effects that ripple through an economy. As Dimon points out in the quote above, banks will inevitably pass this new cost along to consumers, which will in turn function as a brake on business recovery and expansion. If I want a loan to start or expand a small business, I factor in the cost of the loan in my decision-making. When (not if) the banks pass the cost of these new taxes along to me, I’ll have to recalculate my expected profit versus expenses  and determine if my plans are still worthwhile. Maybe they will be, though I’ll have to live with less profit than before. Or (and I think more likely), I’ll scale back my plans: I’ll start a smaller business or not expand as much, hiring fewer people and generating less revenue – or maybe I’ll drop my plans altogether. In the end, the result is less revenue for the government and fewer real jobs created.

Why would they want to do that? 

Read the rest of Stossel’s article to learn about some of the other gems contained in this plan, such as imposing this tax on the banks to make up for losses on money loaned to GM and Chrysler. In other words, making profitable businesses pay to recoup money flushed down the toilet of businesses everyone outside of Washington knew were losers, just so Obama could bailout his supporters at the UAW. I’m sure this will have bankers all over America anxious to start writing loans again. As Joe Biden would say, it’s their patriotic duty!

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: to be a liberal Democrat requires one to purge the mind of even the smallest understanding of basic economics.

Argh.

[Via http://pubsecrets.wordpress.com]

When a Finance Minister appears on Bloomberg ...

… than the fiscal state  of a country is in a really, really, … REALLY bad condition. Timothy Geithner (US Secretary of the Treasury) appeared several times on TV as well as Ben Bernanke (US Federal Reserve Chairman) during the peak of the financial crisis and afterwards.

Greek Finance Minister George Papaconstantinou talks with Bloomberg’s Rishaad Salamat about efforts to reduce the country’s debt. Papaconstantinou, speaking from Athens, also discusses the credibility of the country’s economic statistics and public sector spending cuts.

Extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures, to calm markets and assure them ‘that the situation is “dangerous”, but we have the situation under control.’

Papaconstantinou Expects Greek Debt to Peak Next Year

What is most interesting to note is, that they will tax parts of the economy not taxed before, have a new parliamentary watchdog to check the data of the finance ministry, and that they try to privatize some government entities. According to the finance minister, government debt will peak at 120% to GDP this year, declining afterwards.

[Via http://michaeljung.wordpress.com]

THE HUNT

This world is covered with beauty and love. There is hope in the eyes of the children, and freedom in the clouds as they fly with the wind accross the sky.

But who can see the beauty, and who can feel the love? There’s a dirty window before us its the oppressive pursuit of wealth. Taking the sterile tools of technology from garages, briefcases and factory’s we hunt for dollars.

The Hunt was an occasion for joy. A time for cooperation and sharing, a time to give thanks to nature. No more. Now it is a time for drudgery, isolation and boredom. A time to put your head down and thrust the knife in deep.

How can we see beauty when we stare at the footpath? How can we feel love when we work alone, one against another?

We all want joy and love. A nations economic goal is joy. So the process is more important than the product. We can only beat the oppression of the market if we stand together on humanity’s common ground. Joy is what we want not wealth or economic growth.

[Via http://sereves.wordpress.com]

US Founded Upon Free Trade

Going all the way back to the earliest days of the Great Depression we have had an ongoing debate about free trade and whether or not it is beneficial to our economy and harms our domestic labor market and thus the middle class.  Employment for our lower and middle classes is important to our economy and for the social well being of the nation and therefore it is an area of legitimate concern.   In any economy the market for any product or service will always seek out the least expensive of these.   Thus it has ever been and will always be.   Over restrictive regulations or taxes on any particular product will certainly diminish the importation of that product and will in theory increase the likelihood of more employment domestically to produce that same product.   Unfortunately, history would show that it doesn’t work on a one to one ration that simply.

So often we find that for every job saved by trade restriction we lose another because we face retaliation from foreigners who restrict the import of our products and services.  There is also the problem that other nations may not have the same restrictions we do and continue to import products we restrict and such importation bolsters their economies and make them more competitive with us.   For the last five centuries at least the great struggles of the European powers has been over disputes regarding trading rights and the access to raw materials or resources.  You all remember your world history lessons about the European nations seeking to find access to the resources of the East.  That quest is what lead to all the great explorations starting with Maro Polo, Magellan, Columbus and all the others great seekers and explorers of that age.  They all wanted free trade but each sought to have an advantage over the others by getting there first and controlling areas through Mercantilist policies.

Early American history is all about trading rights and access to resources.  Likewise most of our early conflicts with England and other nations, notably France, was caused by friction from trading and free access to the ocean and international markets.  The early colonialists were mad at the Mother Country because England wanted to keep a strangle hold on the triangle of trade that ran from England to the Caribbean to the Colonies then back to England.  England prevented “American” ships from being involved in this trade.  The New England seafarers wanted in on this lucrative trade.   We wanted to be able to build our own manufacturing base and transport rum from the Caribbean islands.  If England had allowed completely free trade to the Colonies then likely the Revolution would have been at least delayed.  The taxes paid and the lack of representation in Parliament would have been somewhat assuaged by the profits from that trading enterprise.   A strong argument can be made that our revolution was really based upon the desire for free trade more than for political freedoms.  Those sugar, stamp and tea taxes were used to restrict our trading ability more than to control our political aspirations.

When the Dutch Colony of New Netherland received its first charter it went to New Amsterdam which became New York and it explicitly allowed and encouraged free trade. That early Dutch colony was based upon trade with the local Indian tribes for fur.  Beaver and other pelts were transported back to Holland by the thousands.  The Indians would bring the pelts to Albany or even Manhattan in the earliest days for trade. Most folks forget but tobacco was also a valuable commodity of that early day even in that region.  Even today tobacco is grown in Connecticut.   The Dutch wanted free trade for that area because the recognized that it would encourage growth and commerce for New Amsterdam and produce profits for the Dutch West Indies Company back home.   That policy lead to the growth and vigor of New York for over a generation until the English finally acquired New York in one of the several wars between Great Britain and the Dutch during the 17th century.  Those wars were all about trade and each trying to gain an advantage for themselves.  The British finally took New Amsterdam in 1664 during one fo those wars.  Interestingly, the Dutch actually took over again for a very brief time in 1673 during another of the wars but ceded it back to England as part of the peace treaty bringing that war to a close.

One of the world’s most famous streets is Downing in London.  It is named for an Englishman but one born in the American Colonies and a member of the first graduating class from Harvard in 1642.   He moved to  England and became politically wired in with the new royals after the return of Charles II after the death of Cromwell.  Downing was particularly close to the Prince, James Stuart, the Duke of York and got the appointment as ambassador to the Hague in Holland.  It was his idea along with the Duke that specifically lead to the British expedition that seized New Amsterdam in 1664.  Because of the Duke’s involvement and encouragement in this enterprise the city was renamed in his honor.   Thus we have our modern New York City.  Downing for his efforts at thwarting the Dutch came to have his name placed on the street that became the residence for all the future Prime Ministers of Great Britain.  The last Dutch connection came when William of Orange (or Willem) became the King of England in 1688 after the Glorious Revolution to depose James who had converted to Catholicism and because of that the country rebelled.  William was “invited” to take the throne but he arrived with 20,000 Dutch troops on his march to London.  But he was Protestant and that was critically important at the time.   www.olcranky.wordpress.com

[Via http://olcranky.wordpress.com]