BLINDER BLINDER: Alan Blinder: Obama's Fiscal Priorities Are Right - WSJ.com: "- Sent using Google Toolbar"
Sadly, the administration is missing the key issue, which is what it would take to make America a place where companies and individuals can best create and continue and expand businesses.
The fact that every step and bill of the administration is clearly targeted away from business and to provide for the 'unfortunate' - leaves the 'fortunate' to have to keep their wallets closed and look for opportunities elsewhere.
For those living on borrowed and taxed money, the vaunted consumption is met by imported goods (as those are cheapest). Meanwhile, the costs of domestic production are continually raised.
Clearly the administration has it wrong to think that those with the wherewithal to produce will do so no matter what the government throws at them. What happened to General Motors is what is and will be happening to the US economy under Democratic stewardship and the Democrats just don't get it.
The Democrats need to support job creation and wealth creation; not the handout of borrowed money to the jobless. The jobless should shame the Democrats into changing their fiscal policies.
Monday, July 19, 2010
Saturday, July 17, 2010
Democrats Hope Voters Learn to Like Big Initiatives - WSJ.com
AN INDUCED ECONOMIC DROUGHT: Democrats Hope Voters Learn to Like Big Initiatives - WSJ.com: "- Sent using Google Toolbar"
What the Democrats don't seem to understand is that the country doesn't have the money to devote to all these cherished needs of the 'entitled' constituents.
It's sort of like the UAW and GM.
No one has ever said that the benefits the UAW won for its members weren't 'nice' or that they were 'unliked' (as with some of the Health Care Plan of Obama).
But, what is, was and continues to be said - evidenced by the bankruptcy and downsizing of GM and its huge taxpayer bailout - is that these benefits were 'unaffordable'.
Thus, if the goal of the country is create jobs for the modern world-changing economy, then that is where everything else starts and springs from. Sort of like a typical couple starting out in life. You can do so on welfare or you can do so with a job. And, hopefully a job full of promise and advancement.
What the Democrats have done is continue (as the UAW) to think that they can take, take and take and that it never has to end. Paying for all of the benefits is someone else's job.
The 'real' unemployment rate (of over 16%, may 20%) would seem to suggest that they have totally failed. And, like the farmer who stands their without irrigation, just hoping the rains will come, the Democrats don't realize (and can't even conceive of) how their legislation is drying up the economic landscape.
(What's the Democratic economic drought like? Can we say the housing bubble!)
What the Democrats don't seem to understand is that the country doesn't have the money to devote to all these cherished needs of the 'entitled' constituents.
It's sort of like the UAW and GM.
No one has ever said that the benefits the UAW won for its members weren't 'nice' or that they were 'unliked' (as with some of the Health Care Plan of Obama).
But, what is, was and continues to be said - evidenced by the bankruptcy and downsizing of GM and its huge taxpayer bailout - is that these benefits were 'unaffordable'.
Thus, if the goal of the country is create jobs for the modern world-changing economy, then that is where everything else starts and springs from. Sort of like a typical couple starting out in life. You can do so on welfare or you can do so with a job. And, hopefully a job full of promise and advancement.
What the Democrats have done is continue (as the UAW) to think that they can take, take and take and that it never has to end. Paying for all of the benefits is someone else's job.
The 'real' unemployment rate (of over 16%, may 20%) would seem to suggest that they have totally failed. And, like the farmer who stands their without irrigation, just hoping the rains will come, the Democrats don't realize (and can't even conceive of) how their legislation is drying up the economic landscape.
(What's the Democratic economic drought like? Can we say the housing bubble!)
Thursday, July 15, 2010
It's Dippy to Fret About a Double-Dip Recession - Barrons.com
Past as Prologue?: It's Dippy to Fret About a Double-Dip Recession - Barrons.com: "- Sent using Google Toolbar"
In terms of econometric models, has there been a period when such a welter of anti-business tax and regulatory inhibitors existed?
I'd rather say no! And, as such, the ability of any such models to forecast with any degree of reasonable relationship to past events would appear more than highly suspect.
Should one venture out into history, one does seem to find that people do believe that past is prologue and, as such, they are more likely to believe the current anti-business administration will have less impact on jobs and the economy than an iconoclast or maverick might flag as a possibility.
But, who knows? (How many guessed right on the housing bubble?)
In terms of econometric models, has there been a period when such a welter of anti-business tax and regulatory inhibitors existed?
I'd rather say no! And, as such, the ability of any such models to forecast with any degree of reasonable relationship to past events would appear more than highly suspect.
Should one venture out into history, one does seem to find that people do believe that past is prologue and, as such, they are more likely to believe the current anti-business administration will have less impact on jobs and the economy than an iconoclast or maverick might flag as a possibility.
But, who knows? (How many guessed right on the housing bubble?)
Despite good news, July's stock rally runs into resistance. - Barrons.com
ULTIMATE REALITY: Despite good news, July's stock rally runs into resistance. - Barrons.com: "- Sent using Google Toolbar"
Somehow, the market and the economy keeps reminding me of ever higher prices for houses a few years back.
As the gap between incomes and prices kept expanding, so seems the belief that with more and more of the economic wherewithal going to the government (ad infinitum, but likely less), the markets (and the government) seem to believe we can keep the same old jobs and business model going.
Well, there's less for business and a bigger and bigger drag from government (and the entitled). You can fool the market some of the time; but, as with housing, can you confound reality forever?
Somehow, the market and the economy keeps reminding me of ever higher prices for houses a few years back.
As the gap between incomes and prices kept expanding, so seems the belief that with more and more of the economic wherewithal going to the government (ad infinitum, but likely less), the markets (and the government) seem to believe we can keep the same old jobs and business model going.
Well, there's less for business and a bigger and bigger drag from government (and the entitled). You can fool the market some of the time; but, as with housing, can you confound reality forever?
In Washington, Dueling Jobs Summits - WSJ.com
ANCIENNE REGIME: In Washington, Dueling Jobs Summits - WSJ.com: "- Sent using Google Toolbar"
Somehow, what comes to mind here is an inversion of the old Medieval lords and serfs.
In this case, the government (Obama, Pelosi, et al) act the part of the lords and they treat the productive elements of society as the serfs.
The lords wonder why the serfs don't produce more; but, as was common in many parts of the world of the Ancienne Regime, the lords took so much from the peasants that they didn't have anything left to reinvest in improving or expanding production.
In some cases, the Ancienne Regime fell peacefully; and, in other cases (one thinks of the French Revolution), some heads had to roll.
And, like Marie Antoinette, Ram Emmanuel, etc. seem to being saying to business the equivalent of "let them eat cake".
Somehow, what comes to mind here is an inversion of the old Medieval lords and serfs.
In this case, the government (Obama, Pelosi, et al) act the part of the lords and they treat the productive elements of society as the serfs.
The lords wonder why the serfs don't produce more; but, as was common in many parts of the world of the Ancienne Regime, the lords took so much from the peasants that they didn't have anything left to reinvest in improving or expanding production.
In some cases, the Ancienne Regime fell peacefully; and, in other cases (one thinks of the French Revolution), some heads had to roll.
And, like Marie Antoinette, Ram Emmanuel, etc. seem to being saying to business the equivalent of "let them eat cake".
Credit Is Easy for Wall Street but Stays Tight on Main Street - Barrons.com
PROCESS VS. PRODUCT: Credit Is Easy for Wall Street but Stays Tight on Main Street - Barrons.com: "- Sent using Google Toolbar"
Some of this reminds me of the logical outcome of the "process vs. product" arguments that were logically debated in college lectures years ago.
As 'process' wins out (very big in Europe with ISO), one sees that critical judgment is replaced by appropriate judgment. Thus, with more and more regulations of banks replacing critical decision-making, it was easy for banks to load up on AAA-rated subprime debt.
After all, the process said how to use AAA.
Now, we're pushing for even more of the same. Regulations don't ensure good judgment. With fear paramount due to government expanding more and more, is it any wonder that the increasingly government protective turf of banking is buying off on the 'process' prescribed by government?
As Randy notes, the obvious outcome is for banks to do what is 'process-safe'. In other words, just buy sovereign debt (and maybe less of that from Greece, Portugal, etc.)
Some of this reminds me of the logical outcome of the "process vs. product" arguments that were logically debated in college lectures years ago.
As 'process' wins out (very big in Europe with ISO), one sees that critical judgment is replaced by appropriate judgment. Thus, with more and more regulations of banks replacing critical decision-making, it was easy for banks to load up on AAA-rated subprime debt.
After all, the process said how to use AAA.
Now, we're pushing for even more of the same. Regulations don't ensure good judgment. With fear paramount due to government expanding more and more, is it any wonder that the increasingly government protective turf of banking is buying off on the 'process' prescribed by government?
As Randy notes, the obvious outcome is for banks to do what is 'process-safe'. In other words, just buy sovereign debt (and maybe less of that from Greece, Portugal, etc.)
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
U.S. Seeks to Recoup Fannie, Freddie Losses - WSJ.com
PERFIDY: U.S. Seeks to Recoup Fannie, Freddie Losses - WSJ.com: "- Sent using Google Toolbar"
Could this be another example of where the government screws up badly (and under political pressure in this case) and then tries to put all the blame on the private sector?
And, could this perfidy on the part of government be one more restraint on the revival of the economy?
Hmmm. One does seem to read such things!
Could this be another example of where the government screws up badly (and under political pressure in this case) and then tries to put all the blame on the private sector?
And, could this perfidy on the part of government be one more restraint on the revival of the economy?
Hmmm. One does seem to read such things!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
