Why Labor Backs 'Occupy Wall Street' - WSJ.com
Ms. Henry is clearly one of those people who want something and because they want it, it should happen.
The fact that they are actually working against the very things they want is beyond their ability to see; and, those that are really causing the problem have convinced her it can't possibly be 'their' fault - of course we are speaking about government policies and union policies that breed, fester and all to go epidemic - the sense of entitlement.
The world is full of people who want a free lunch and there's nothing more grating than not getting it when the leaders you've elected and have been pandering to you to get elected finally can't deliver.
The Greeks are finding that out and anyone with basic logic and math skills can see that if you beat up on bankers and come up with regulatory rules that sound good but are hollow (lets say Basel II for starters), then the banks don't lend (see the article recently on the banker in Texas who said every loan gets a thorough going-over and going-over again by the FDIC). So the government sets rules which inhibit bankers from lending - but then, of course, the government hues and cries it is innocent.
What is scary is that the crazies like this writer are about in the land spreading entitlement blah blah that is further hurting job creation. And, these people don't get it.
Sadly, there aren't enough politicians risking taking them on. Like kids with no adult supervision, children can easily run amuck.
Sunday, October 9, 2011
Saturday, October 8, 2011
The Daily Democratic Gaff: Up & Down Wall Street - Barrons.com
Up & Down Wall Street - Barrons.com
"... If real growth is absent, employment and real income growth will not return. Real growth cannot develop with the national debt overhang. " BM
And, not just the debt overhang.
It's easy to see there has to be someone to blame - someone else of course - when things turn nasty.
But when one sees the Greeks striking against cutting wages and dismissing employees who have no meaningful job; yet, there may not be money to pay the wages in a matter of weeks, one does have to wonder if people who rely on others to keep coming up with the wherewithal haven't a problem that is un-addressed?
What is said is that Democrats are coming up with plans these very Greek strikers would believe in; and, with the same mindset.
As you say - there's no idea of real growth policies. Every day there is something else anti-growth the Administration embarks upon.
Sadly, there's no reporter or Republican candidate with a daily diatribe against the daily gaff of the Democrats and the President. Ah well!
"... If real growth is absent, employment and real income growth will not return. Real growth cannot develop with the national debt overhang. " BM
And, not just the debt overhang.
It's easy to see there has to be someone to blame - someone else of course - when things turn nasty.
But when one sees the Greeks striking against cutting wages and dismissing employees who have no meaningful job; yet, there may not be money to pay the wages in a matter of weeks, one does have to wonder if people who rely on others to keep coming up with the wherewithal haven't a problem that is un-addressed?
What is said is that Democrats are coming up with plans these very Greek strikers would believe in; and, with the same mindset.
As you say - there's no idea of real growth policies. Every day there is something else anti-growth the Administration embarks upon.
Sadly, there's no reporter or Republican candidate with a daily diatribe against the daily gaff of the Democrats and the President. Ah well!
On Elites and Then Elites: Up & Down Wall Street - Barrons.com
Up & Down Wall Street - Barrons.com
If by 'financial elite' you refer to the solons who dream up regulatory nightmares like Basel II and III and the generous liberal political souls who believe in a free lunch for the poor (let Barney Frank and Chris Dodd and of course the dear president come to mind) - then I would agree.
But, I believe these are the exculpated parties.
As such, you appear to call-to-account the liberal belief in being able to regulate away unpleasantness. So Basel says sovereign debt or AAA paper is like cash. No more thinking needed!
As such, the 'elite' might be and have been more like lemmings and faultless.
If by 'financial elite' you refer to the solons who dream up regulatory nightmares like Basel II and III and the generous liberal political souls who believe in a free lunch for the poor (let Barney Frank and Chris Dodd and of course the dear president come to mind) - then I would agree.
But, I believe these are the exculpated parties.
As such, you appear to call-to-account the liberal belief in being able to regulate away unpleasantness. So Basel says sovereign debt or AAA paper is like cash. No more thinking needed!
As such, the 'elite' might be and have been more like lemmings and faultless.
Friday, October 7, 2011
The math of starting a business in Britain: Central Banks Step Up Battle to Contain Crisis - WSJ.com
Central Banks Step Up Battle to Contain Crisis - WSJ.com
The math of starting a business in Britain:
Borrow 1,000,000 pounds. Payback loan in 5 years.
Business Profits = ?
Well, the direct equity to be paid back per year would be (1m/5 ) 200,000.
Since this would be subject to tax (at 50%), then just to pay back the loan, the borrower would have to earn 400,000 (that is before any money for living expenses).
So for 1 million in borrowing, the business would have to generate 400,000 per year to pay it back in 5 years.
Gee - how many businesses can generate that kind of return - before of course any profits to the investor or entrepreneur?
The math of starting a business in Britain:
Borrow 1,000,000 pounds. Payback loan in 5 years.
Business Profits = ?
Well, the direct equity to be paid back per year would be (1m/5 ) 200,000.
Since this would be subject to tax (at 50%), then just to pay back the loan, the borrower would have to earn 400,000 (that is before any money for living expenses).
So for 1 million in borrowing, the business would have to generate 400,000 per year to pay it back in 5 years.
Gee - how many businesses can generate that kind of return - before of course any profits to the investor or entrepreneur?
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
catch 22: IMF Floats Bond-Buying Proposal in Europe - WSJ.com
IMF Floats Bond-Buying Proposal in Europe - WSJ.com
All the socialist countries (including the US) appear like the family living on credit cards - and now, suddenly, market forces want to adjust interest rates.
It would seem as though there is a catch 22. In other words, if the economy is in the tank, the rates stay low but taxes and growth can't compensate for social spending. If the economy rebounds, then interest rates will rise and the cost of previous social spending will be unpayable.
The outcome in either case would appear to be less than sanguine.
All the socialist countries (including the US) appear like the family living on credit cards - and now, suddenly, market forces want to adjust interest rates.
It would seem as though there is a catch 22. In other words, if the economy is in the tank, the rates stay low but taxes and growth can't compensate for social spending. If the economy rebounds, then interest rates will rise and the cost of previous social spending will be unpayable.
The outcome in either case would appear to be less than sanguine.
Saturday, October 1, 2011
Fool me once...fool me twice...: Markets Struggle to Price Uncertainty - Barrons.com
Markets Struggle to Price Uncertainty - Barrons.com
Let's see:
> The regulators snookered the banks into taking on Sovereign paper instead of keeping cash, gold or making loans to entrepreneurs.
> There isn't much of any growth - especially in the heavily socialized and unionized Southern parts of Europe.
> So all these countries talk about a 'growth agenda' (ostensibly so people won't concentrate on the terrible state they are in or their anti-investment, anti-growth polices; and, then, to top it off, they raise taxes.
Isn't this sort of like "fool me once...fool me twice..."?
Let's see:
> The regulators snookered the banks into taking on Sovereign paper instead of keeping cash, gold or making loans to entrepreneurs.
> There isn't much of any growth - especially in the heavily socialized and unionized Southern parts of Europe.
> So all these countries talk about a 'growth agenda' (ostensibly so people won't concentrate on the terrible state they are in or their anti-investment, anti-growth polices; and, then, to top it off, they raise taxes.
Isn't this sort of like "fool me once...fool me twice..."?
The type of presidential campaign I'd like to see - focused on jobs and the economy: Amateur Hour at the White House - WSJ.com
Amateur Hour at the White House - WSJ.com
It would be interesting to see some candidate for President - any candidate - spend all their time talking about restoring the economy.
What would this mean to me?
For starters, any day there is news about some anti-business, anti-economic policy being pursued by Obama (take the SEC this week and its prosecution based on negligence).
There are clearly those from the Obama administration and the general population who don't want solutions for the economy itself, they want 'to blame' someone else for the problem; or, to first ensure that the socialist benefits of liberal programs are protected (i.e. why not raise taxes on the very people who create jobs? That can't be a problem! Warren Buffet's in favor of it, right?).
Every day, a preferred candidate would start their stump speech with something that needs to be changed and is holding back the economy (this would not include taxing oil companies or preventing Boeing from opening a factory in the South. It clearly might include things to equalize the taxes businesses would pay in the US vs. another country.)
It would be interesting to see some candidate for President - any candidate - spend all their time talking about restoring the economy.
What would this mean to me?
For starters, any day there is news about some anti-business, anti-economic policy being pursued by Obama (take the SEC this week and its prosecution based on negligence).
There are clearly those from the Obama administration and the general population who don't want solutions for the economy itself, they want 'to blame' someone else for the problem; or, to first ensure that the socialist benefits of liberal programs are protected (i.e. why not raise taxes on the very people who create jobs? That can't be a problem! Warren Buffet's in favor of it, right?).
Every day, a preferred candidate would start their stump speech with something that needs to be changed and is holding back the economy (this would not include taxing oil companies or preventing Boeing from opening a factory in the South. It clearly might include things to equalize the taxes businesses would pay in the US vs. another country.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
