Posts Tagged ‘Economics’

American Socio Economics

December 2, 2008

The current state of Social Economics in America made me think that perhaps a few quotable quotes might be in order.Yes, they are humorous, but come with meaning.


“If you don’t read the newspaper you are uninformed,

if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed.”

Mark Twain



Suppose you were an idiot.
And suppose you were a member of Congress….
But then I repeat myself.
-Mark Twain



I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.
-Winston Churchill


A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
-.George Bernard Shaw


Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.
-James Bovard, Civil Libertarian (1994)

Foreign aid might be defined as a transfer of money from poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries.   -Douglas Casey, Classmate of Bill Clinton

Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.
-P.J. O’Rourke, Civil Libertarian

I don’t make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts.
-Will Rogers

If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it’s free!
-P.J. O’Rourke

In general, the art of government consists of taking as much money as possible from one party of the citizens to give to the other.
-Voltaire (1764)

Just because you do not take an interest in politics doesn’t mean politics won’t take an interest in you!
-Pericles (430 B.C.)


No man’s life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session.

-Mark Twain (1866)

Talk is cheap…except when Congress does it.
-Unknown

The government is like a baby’s alimentary canal, with a happy appetite at one end and no responsibility at the other.
-Ronald Reagan

The only difference between a tax man and a taxidermist is that the taxidermist leaves the skin.
-Mark Twain



There is no distinctly Native American criminal class…save Congress.
-Mark Twain



What this country needs are more unemployed politicians.
-Edward Langley, Artist (1928 – 1995)


A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.

-Thomas Jefferson


Forget Bretton Woods II – we need a gold standard

November 20, 2008

Seems that what I have said over the years, as well as many others have about fiat money is getting some press…

Too much credit and easy money. Those were the biggest culprits behind this financial crisis. Yet, apallingly, the government’s rescue attempt is built on more credit and even easier money. That’s like giving a procrastinator a deadline extension. By choosing this course, Washington has steered us on to the “road to Weimar” – the road to runaway inflation.

It didn’t have to come to this. And it still doesn’t. But the proper remedy will take tremendous political courage: Bring back the gold standard. That, more than any byzantine regulations that emerge from the Bretton Woods II conference this weekend, would provide stability and safety for nations and individuals around the world.

Sadly, current policy seems to reflect a desire to weaken the dollar as quickly as possible.

The Federal Reserve’s own data tells the story. The headline is the doubling of Federal Reserve credit, the main component of the US monetary base. Since Labor Day 2008, it’s risen from $894 billion to $2.2 trillion.

That’s the greatest monetary expansion in the Fed’s 95-year history. How the Fed is doing it matters almost as much. It has nearly abandoned its traditional instrument for monetary policy, open-market operations, which involves the purchasing and selling of full-faith-and-credit US Treasury securities. With increasing frequency and amounts, it has relied primarily on “discount window operations” – lending to specific institutions for specific purposes instead of general injections of funds into an open market – since August 2007. This shift may weaken its ability to “tighten” monetary conditions should inflation reach dangerous levels.

A gold standard offers exactly the kind of discipline that’s missing from the Fed. But its impact would be wider: Both in substance and in symbolism, gold provides integrity to the entire global financial system. Governments, however, have historically bridled at the constraint and accountability a gold standard brings. After all, when currency can be exchanged for gold, it’s harder for governments to inflate the money supply, which they’re tempted to do in order to spend beyond their means or cheat on their debts.

~snip~ Full story here

Related story from the Wall Street Journal

… To the shores of Somalia

November 18, 2008

Has the time come for a change in the Marine Corps Hymn? Piracy on the high seas has always been a problem. But, in recent history it was more like a gnat on a cows butt. Just not that big of a problem.

Enter those capitalistic souls in the beleaguered nation state called Somalia. Reputedly having ties to various terrorist organizations, as well as those that are just looking to make a few dollars the Somali pirates are morphing into international prominence.

Has the time come to send in the Marines? With some pretty lax, by normal standards, rules of engagement? Heck, Barack Obama could establish a legacy right off the bat that would put him squarely in the same sort of caliber as Thomas Jefferson. Not to mention save the economy of several nations. I certainly do not see George Bush as having the stones, to use a Brit phrase, to get this much needed task accomplished.

In the mean time piracy on the high seas has become a lucrative profession. Read about this up and coming lucrative profession here.

Gold Rush! Cash in while you can!

November 14, 2008

The continuing debate over the current financial crisis aside the dash for the latest government gold rush appears to be in full swing. Government policy started the crisis, not the so-called free market. Now, the government seeks to make matters worse while appearing to make life better. At least for those that have the ability to contribute the millions that it takes to stay in elected office.

When governments attempt to “fix” economies by meddling with the free markets that power them, these would-be market-driven economies become political footballs. Economic decisions that would have been fairly and justly arbitrated by unbiased, natural laws of economics become decided on purely political grounds. Markets lose stability in direct proportion to the extent of such meddling. This is certainly the case with the government “fix” known as TARP, or Troubled Asset Relief Program. The bailout package was originally crafted to relieve banks so that they would remain solvent, preventing further meltdown of the U.S. economy. But with $700 billion up for grabs, TARP’s original purpose was thrown under the bus in the gold rush that ensued. Now everyone wants in on the government’s largess, and markets have reacted accordingly. And why not? Why shouldn’t we all line up to “get ours” if the government is giving away “free” money? Sadly, this seems to be the new American corporate mindset.

Insurance giant AIG, for instance, is now slated to receive more than $150 billion in the largest single bailout allotment from TARP thus far. The government effectively nationalized AIG in the process, establishing a $40 billion stake in the world’s largest insurer. Eager to get in on the TARP lottery, American Express — that’s right, the credit card company — is apparently also now a “bank,” having been so blessed by the Federal Reserve. Evidently unaware of AMEX’s subtle approach, one draping the hat-in-hand recipient in “bank-like” trappings, U.S. automakers are pursuing more blunt-instrument strategies. Their game plan? Simply demand funds from Washington on the basis that, well, they need the cash, and everyone else seems to be getting an awful lot of it lately. Perfect.

The government has committed $290 billion so far without any oversight because Congress has yet to fill the positions it created. Somewhere in all of this thrash for cash is a lesson about the proper role of government in a free market economy. We just hope that this lesson hits home before The Great Depression, Part II does.

source: Patriot Post

Oh Lord, it’s hard to be humble…

October 22, 2008

Government regulation, not free-market greed, caused this crisis

As the song goes, it’s hard to be humble sometimes, at least when you post about political economic realities. Below is vindication of my earlier ststed position about the current financial crisis.

Many observers, including most politicians, have blamed the ongoing financial crisis on the “free-market greed” supposedly unleashed by the “reckless deregulation” of the financial system. Such arguments are rhetorically powerful, but they don’t stand up to scrutiny.

If they go unchallenged, however, they could hasten a “solution” that’s worse than the problem. That’s why it’s so important to examine the record. What it shows is that government regulations and other interventions – not greed – are the major cause of our current problems.

Greed, or at least self-interest, is always present to some degree in the economy. Why has greed suddenly produced so much harm, and why only in one sector of the economy?

Firms are profit seekers, but they will seek it where the institutional incentives signal profit is available. In a free market, firms profit by satisfying their customers, investing wisely, and making prudent loans. Regulations, policies, and political rhetoric can change those incentives.

When the law either poorly defines the rules of the game or tries to override them through regulation, the invisible hand that makes self-interested behavior mutually beneficial may become more of a fist.

In such cases, “greed” can lead to problems, not caused by greed but by the institutional context channeling self-interest in socially unproductive ways.

To call the housing and credit crisis a failure of the free market or the product of unregulated greed is to overlook the myriad government regulations, policies, and political pronouncements that have both reduced the freedom of this market and led self-interested actors to produce disastrous consequences, often unintentionally.

Full Story Here

Economic Crises, facts, fictions etc.

October 4, 2008

The current economic crises is interesting to say the least. Pointing one’s finger at someone else, who is pointing their finger at another, who is pointing their finger at you seems to be the main theme. Politics as usual? Or is there something more sinister about all this? The following is from The Patriot Post:

“[A] wise and frugal government… shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.” —Thomas Jefferson

INSIGHT

“Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan

“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy.” —Ernest Benn

UPDATE FROM MARK ALEXANDER

Bailout v. Workout—The continuing crisis

If you did not catch our commentary on the current financial crisis, Bailout Basics, I encourage you to read this brief but comprehensive analysis of the current confidence deficit plaguing our financial markets.

By way of update, as we anticipated, the so-called bailout “deal for taxpayers” did not pass the House Monday.

Though the Bill under consideration had substantial support from conservative organizations like our friends at the Heritage Foundation, and other free-market advocates with trade associations, most House Republicans still objected to the bill because it involved the biggest government intervention in the market since the Great Depression, and did not include sufficient market incentives such as significant tax and spending reductions.

But, media reports to the contrary, it was the Democrats who killed this bill. Had House Speaker Nancy Pelosi lined up the 95 liberal Demos who voted against this legislation, including five Democrat committee chairman, half the Congressional Black Caucus and a majority of the Hispanic Caucus, the plan would have passed.

Democrats voted it down because it did not include enough largesse for their constituents, including billions for Leftist organizations, unions, etc. (For example, read “The Meltdown’s Acorn.”)

Responding to the dysfunction on the Hill, there was a significant selloff in the financial markets on Monday. However, indicating that there is still plenty of rational thought in the market, securities rebounded Tuesday as investors went bottom fishing for stocks that were selling well under their earnings potential.

However, there is real danger that the markets will continue to sell off, threatening the livelihood of many Americans.

As President George W. Bush said Tuesday morning, “As much as we might wish the situation were different, our country is not facing a choice between government action and the smooth functioning of the free market. We’re facing a choice between action and the real prospect of economic hardship for millions of Americans.”

Unfortunately, the “deal” that failed on Monday, may have been the best deal possible for House Republicans.

The Senate will convene Wednesday night to consider a similar plan, which also includes a temporary increase in FDIC insurance for large depositors and extensions of expired business tax reductions. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell described the Senate plan as “one of the finer moments in the Senate.”

However, now that House Democrats and their media lemmings have falsely blamed their impasse on Republicans, they are likely to come roaring back Thursday with a proposition “to save America,” including all the largesse they originally wanted. Like pigs at an open trough, nothing attracts big spenders like a crisis requiring emergency spending.

Senate deliberations notwithstanding, Democrats can pass that legislation (as they could have passed the bill Monday) without a single Republican vote, and all their shenanigans have been calculated to ensure the election of Barack Hussein Obama.

Obama and the Democrats have been playing the “economic fear card” for the past four years, using the economy as political fodder for their campaigns. As Demo-gogue Nancy Pelosi framed it: “For too long, this government, in eight years, has followed a right-wing ideology of anything goes, no supervision, no discipline, no regulation.”

As for all the Leftmedia economic fear card play, rest assured, ads like those produced and paid for by MoveOn.org blaming John McCain for the meltdown and now running on Leftwing media outlets like CNN and NBC are nothing more than fabrications wrapped in deceptions embedded in lies.

If there is not an amenable solution by Friday, and if the Republicans have it in them—surely John McCain does—it is time for them to put forward a bold plan of attack and force the Democrats’ hand. We deserve serious debate about the future principles that will guide our economy, and let the people voice their opinion on Election Day, 4 November 2008.

For information about the origins of this financial crisis, I refer you to the following Web pages:

From The New York Times in 1999: Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending “Fannie Mae, the nation’s biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people…”

From the New York Post: Alarms and Denial

Bloomberg Financial News: “How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis”

YouTube: Democrats in their own words

YouTube: Burning Down the House

YouTube: Obama Ranks Second In Freddie/Fannie Contributions

And a timely endorsement from the Boston Herald: McCain for president: A certain leader for uncertain times

White House: Three page Legislative Proposal for Treasury Authority to Purchase Mortgage-Related Assets

House of Representatives: 109 page LPTAPMR Discussion Draft

Contact President Bush—http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/

Contact your Senator—http://www.senate.gov/

Contact your Representative—http://www.house.gov/

House and Senate switchboard: 202-224-3121

UPRIGHT

“It’s incredible how generous you can be with other people’s money.” —Star Parker

“So, yes, our recent financial turmoil does suggest failure—a failure to truly practice capitalism and a failure to accept and believe in the value, appropriateness and morality of a limited government and maximum personal responsibility.” —Larry Elder

“Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac do not deserve to be bailed out, but neither do workers, families and businesses deserve to be put through the economic wringer by a collapse of credit markets, such as occurred during the Great Depression of the 1930s. Neither do the voters deserve to be deceived on the eve of an election by the notion that this is a failure of free markets that should be replaced by political micro-managing.” —Thomas Sowell

“Treasury Secretary Paulson, asked about conservative complaints that his rescue program amounts to socialism, said, essentially: This is not socialism, this is necessary. That non sequitur might be politically necessary, but remember that government control of capital is government control of capitalism.” —George Will

“It is an affront to the nation that some of the people who brought on the crisis (and financially and politically benefited from the status quo) were asking the questions at the Banking Committee hearing. They should have been in the witness chair. [Sen. Chris] Dodd said the crisis was ‘entirely foreseeable and preventable.’ Then why didn’t he try to prevent it? He should have been answering questions about the PAC contributions he received from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, (according to opensecrets.org, he’s the Senate’s no. 1 recipient of campaign contributions, $133,900, Barack Obama is no. 3, $105,849), his sweetheart Countrywide Financial mortgage rate and whether they influenced his inattentiveness to the growing mortgage crisis.” —Cal Thomas

Economics, the art of making something utterly simple into something astoundingly incomprehensible…

The 27 Characteristics of the Anti Christ

October 1, 2008

What follows below was stolen from TexasFred, and I attribute it to him, in all his glory! Strong Work MARINE!

Barack Obama will lead this nation to destruction. Just look at what he proposes. We could, by golly, become the new Soviet Union if things work out. It simply goes down hill from there, and I am not talking about a ski run either. Please do not mis-understand me. I am no fan of John McCain either…

1. He comes from among ten kings in the restored Roman Empire; his authority will have similarities to the ancient Babylonians, Persians, and Greeks [Daniel 7:24; Rev 13:2 / Daniel 7:7]

2. He will subdue three kings [Daniel 7:8, 24]

3. He is different from the other kings [Daniel 7:24]

4. He will rise from obscurity… a “little horn” [Daniel 7:8]

5. He will speak boastfully [Daniel 7:8; Rev 13:5]

6. He will blaspheme God, [Daniel 7:25; 11:36; Rev 13:5] slandering His Name, dwelling place, and departed Christians and Old Testament saints [Rev 13:6]

7. He will oppress the saints and be successful for 3 ½ years [Daniel 7:25; Rev 13:7]

8. He will try to change the calendar, perhaps to define a new era, related to himself [Daniel 7:25]

9. He will try to change the laws, perhaps to gain an advantage for his new kingdom and era [Dan 7:25]

10. He will not be succeeded by another earthly ruler, but by Christ [Daniel 7:26-27]

11. He will confirm a covenant with “many”, i.e. the Jewish people [Daniel 9:27] This covenant will likely involve the establishment of a Jewish Temple in Jerusalem [see Dan 9:27; Matt 24:15]

12. He will put an end to Jewish sacrifice and offerings after 3 ½ years and will set up an abomination to God in the Temple [Daniel 9:27, Matthew 24:15]

13. He will not answer to a higher earthly authority; “He will do as he pleases”[Daniel 11:36]

14. He will show no regard for the religion of his ancestors [Daniel 11:37]

15. He will not believe in any god at all [except for himself] [Daniel 11:37]

16. He will have “no regard for the desire of women”: He will either be asexual or homosexual [Dan 11:37]

17. He will claim to be greater than any god [Daniel 11:37; 2 Thess 2:4]

18. He will claim to be God [2 Thessalonians 2:4]

19. He will only honor a “god” of the military. His whole focus and attention will be on his military. He will conquer lands and distribute them [Daniel 11:39-44]

20. His arrival on the world scene will be accompanied by miracles, signs and wonders [2 Thess 2:9]

21. Either he, or his companion [The False Prophet], will claim to be Christ [Matt 24:21-28]

22. He will claim that Jesus did not come in the flesh, or that Jesus did not rise bodily from the grave [2 John 7]. He will deny that Jesus is the Messiah [I John 2:22]

23. He will be worshipped by many people [Rev. 13:8]

24. He will hate a nation that initially will have some control over his kingdom, but he will destroy this nation [Rev 17:16-18]

25. He will appear to survive a fatal injury [Rev. 13:3; 17:8]

26. His name will be related to the number six hundred and sixty six—but not necessarily in an obvious fashion [Rev 13:17-18].

27. He will be empowered by the devil himself [Rev. 13:2]

Source:
The 27 characteristics of the Anti Christ

Mumbo Jimbo, and letters from Senators

October 1, 2008

I’m not from Texas, but I do support many Texan’s that hold public office Senator Cornyn being one of them. I do take exception to a letter that I recieved in my email today though. How many Senators failed Economics 101? Or 120? Those are Macro and Micro Economics. I’m not picking on either ruling political parties, one is as bad as the other on this one.

Below is political pandering period. Want to fix things? First, go to a solid standard, such as Gold. Transferred SIC.

Sincerely,
Senator Cornyn's signature

John Cornyn
United State Senator

Dear Patrick,

Tonight, the United States Senate will vote on The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. The bill is designed to immediately address the web of complex and broken financial relationships that are choking the economic system, and avoid a systemic financial collapse that would devastate the economy and have severe consequences for all Americans.

My office has fielded thousands of calls on this subject this week. I appreciate so many taking the time and effort to share their thoughts with me on such an important subject. I know many of you are extremely upset about the idea of the government doing any type of bail out for Wall Street, and I completely agree with you. I also regret that the Administration mishandled early communications on this plan, seeming to focus on a bailout of finance industry firms instead of concentrating on the need to protect the interests of Main Street. It is difficult to consider approving any proposal after this uneven performance.

If we do nothing, however, the potential consequences are dire. My concern is not with the Wall Street financier who gambled and lost. It’s with the 60-year-old worker nearing retirement and seeing his savings disappear, and the small business owner who cannot make payroll because his credit line has been frozen, and the untold numbers of employees who could find themselves unemployed.

None of these people should pay for the greed and irresponsibility of a few unethical or greedy individuals. Wall Street needs to be held accountable. I was among those who sought an investigation of the housing finance system two years ago, without success. I renewed that call this week, along with a demand for a criminal investigation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. If there was illegal conduct, it should be pursued.

Before I go to vote, I wanted make certain you know that the bill before us is far different from the three-page “take it or leave it” version that the Treasury Secretary handed us ten days ago. It has been improved from the original proposal.

The proposed legislation contains substantially more oversight. Instead of a blank check, with unlimited discretion for the Treasury Secretary, the bill sets up a comprehensive system of review aimed at preventing further abuses. It sets up procedures for the government – and taxpayers – to recoup a good portion or even all of the expended funds, through warrants and other instruments. If the plan is approved and works as expected, it is now highly likely that the impact will be considerably less than the original price tag.

The bill also deletes most of the more egregious special interest provisions, such as the proposal for profit sharing with left-wing advocacy groups such as ACORN.

It also includes multiple taxpayer protections. It prohibits unjust enrichment by barring a participating institution from selling an asset to the Treasury for more than was paid for it. It also includes strict restrictions on executive pay for affected companies, making the golden parachute for executives of distressed firms a thing of the past. It also requires profits from the transactions be used to pay down our national debt, and not to fund pet projects or to expand the size of the federal government.

The bill also brings some much needed transparency to our government by requiring the Treasury Department to publicly disclose the details of all of their program transactions in monthly reports. Treasury would also be required to issue supplemental reports when it makes a $50 billion commitment to purchase troubled assets. These reports must detail each of the agreements made, any insurance contracts and the nature of the assets purchased and projected costs and liabilities.

As an added benefit for Texas, the bill now includes badly-needed funding for areas hit by Hurricane Ike, plus extension of the tax deductability of sales taxes, and renewable energy credits that represent sound public policy.

Tonight’s vote is not the end of the process, but the beginning. Congress needs to continue to work together on bipartisan reforms to make certain this inexcusable meltdown never occurs again. There is serious debate over who is to blame for this – and there are many candidates, in New York, Washington and elsewhere — but there should be no argument about responsibility if reforms aren’t enacted forthwith. Congress has an obligation to put partisan politics aside and work together in the best interest of the American people.

The AIG Collapse

September 17, 2008

Those that complain about the economy all to often consider laissez-faire to be Free Market Economics.This simply is not true, and the “AIG Bailout”is a good example of why that is so. Even in capitalist countries, where Free Markets are the norm there are laws and practices that serve to protect the public.

Certainly because of the scope of a failure by AIG, intervention of some sort was badly needed. A collapse would have had International Macroeconomic implications that at least theoretically, could have caused financial collapse worldwide.

The takeover, or bailout as I see it by the government, is more a Free Market approach, than simply taking AIG over. It appears to be more of a private enterprise buyout, but only time will tell.

Income Redistribution: Bailing out states

August 15, 2008

Capital flow, the minutia of macroeconomics that gives the science its appeal, is the key to economic growth. Communities compete with incentives including reduced taxes and discounted land with high capacity infrastructure to attract new capital flow for job creation. The trade off is that the tax base generated by the new industry will offset the initial cost of infrastructure and reduced tax revenues. This mode of operation extends to the state level as well, albeit on a larger scale.

However, state governments often appear bi-polar, with an Economic Development Division promoting the state as an excellent environment for investment while the Department of Revenue—at the behest of the state legislature—seeks to maximize the revenue from businesses. Michigan is a perfect case study, with its “Michigan Golf” radio promotions touting the state as a vacation destination while the business media reports on its one-state recession and the economic mismanagement of Democrat Gov. Jennifer Granholm. The taxation and regulation regimen proposed by Granholm and codified by the Michigan Legislature has spurred the flow of economic and intellectual capital away from Michigan over the last eight years, yielding increased unemployment, increased demand for public assistance and increased budget deficits.

For the better part of two decades business schools have drilled students in the portability of capital in information-driven economies. There are only two impediments to capital flow: lack of natural resources and the possibility of asset confiscation by local authorities. By their rhetoric, we know that Granholm of Michigan and Gov. David Paterson of New York have no qualms about wealth redistribution, but they don’t have the tools (or the guts) necessary to take it to the extreme of, say, Hugo Chavez in Venezuela. Instead, they will beseech Congress to increase its benevolence upon their respective states by increasing taxes on the whole of the country. Their political calculus is simple: Increase the regulatory and tax burden across the entire country, and then their respective states won’t look so bad.

source