Life, Liberty, and the $2 Gallon of Gas

June 26th, 2009

Thank you Madame Speaker and I thank the gentleman from Virginia. I support the gentleman’s amendment. We know Madame Speaker that this national energy tax will cost the American people two trillion dollars. We know this will result in the loss of 2.5 million jobs every year for the American people. We know that. We know this will result in a reduced standard of living for Americans. We know that. What is the point, and what’s the benefit? Baht buhw—what’s worse than this is that now because of this underlying bill, the Federal Government will virtually have control over every aspect of lives for the American people. It is time to stand up and say, “We get to choose. We choose liberty, or we choose tyranny.” It’s one of the two. The underlying bill represents the tyranny and intervention of the Federal Government. Mr. Forbes’ amendment represents liberty for the American people. What will we choose today? Will we choose liberty, or will we choose tyranny? I choose Mr. Forbes’ amendment … mumble mumble yield mumble…

Michelle Bachmann

The problem with the Republicans as I see it is that their methods were too successful. They built a support base composed of the ignorant and the gullible, and over time some of those same people rose in the ranks to become leaders of the party. So you end up with a party with Michelle Bachmann, John Boehner, and Sarah Palin as your most visible outspoken members - people lacking in reason and discernment.

Just To Clarify

June 18th, 2009

Just to clarify, I am not opposed to Obama’s actions on the economy - so far he’s done pretty well with a terrible set of starting conditions. I am, and have been opposed to Paul Krugman - first regarding his assertion that there was no manipulation going on in the oil markets last year, then in his continued sophistry in criticizing rational plans by the Obama administration. Now he’s taken his target off of Obama and started taking easy potshots at the Republicans. Puzzling, to say the least, but as long as he’s not actively undermining the recovery process so be it.

Japanese Pair Arrested in Italy Carrying $134B in U.S. Treasury Bonds

June 16th, 2009

Japanese Pair Arrested in Italy Carrying $134B in U.S. Treasury Bonds

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article6507161.ece

It’s possible they were just worried there wouldn’t be any toilet paper at their hotel.

They’re Worse Than The French

June 1st, 2009

In his first official visit to China since becoming Treasury Secretary, Mr Geithner told politicians and academics in Beijing that he still supports a strong US dollar, and insisted that the trillions of dollars of Chinese investments would not be unduly damaged by the economic crisis. Speaking at Peking University, Mr Geithner said: “Chinese assets are very safe.”

The comment provoked loud laughter from the audience of students.

link

New Things

May 30th, 2009

Things have thankfully settled down a bit and I have time to do some long overdue system maintenance. While driving to get a backup hard drive I had the thought that I no longer consciously know how my shoes get tied. I know that my shoe goes on my foot, then something happens, and next thing I know my shoe is securely on my foot. I even remember being taught to tie my shoes - but the actual mechanics of the whole thing no longer resides in my memory. Much like, I would assume, typing. So while I’m backing bits up from drive to drive I thought I’d see how difficult it would be to learn a different keyboard layout (the dvorak layout) which is purportedly a more logical configuration. Let me assure you that it’s hellaciously difficult - I’ve been typing since I was five so there are many years of learned behavior to overcome.

Krugman Pulls a Boner

May 30th, 2009

boner

‘A month ago Mr Krugman and I sat on a panel convened in New York to discuss the financial crisis. I made the point that “the running of massive fiscal deficits in excess of 12 per cent of gross domestic product this year, and the issuance therefore of vast quantities of freshly-minted bonds” was likely to push long-term interest rates up, at a time when the Federal Reserve aims at keeping them down. I predicted a “painful tug-of-war between our monetary policy and our fiscal policy, as the markets realise just what a vast quantity of bonds are going to have to be absorbed by the financial system this year”.

‘De haut en bas came the patronising response: I belonged to a “Dark Age” of economics. It was “really sad” that my knowledge of the dismal science had not even got up to 1937 (the year after Keynes’s General Theory was published), much less its zenith in 2005 (the year Mr Krugman’s macro-economics textbook appeared). Did I not grasp that the key to the crisis was “a vast excess of desired savings over willing investment”? “We have a global savings glut,” explained Mr Krugman, “which is why there is, in fact, no upward pressure on interest rates.”’

Niall Ferguson

A World of His Own

May 29th, 2009

Paul “Busta Rhymes” Krugman phones it in from Abu Dhabi: No Threat of Inflation. If you’re only looking at stability in the price of washing machines, there is no inflation. If you’re looking at food, fuel, electricity like most of us, there is inflation. If you’re looking at a sinking dollar not being able to purchase raw materials or oil there is and will be inflation. Krugman treats the American economy as a closed system (we owe the money to ourselves, creating money is irrelevant) when it supports what he wants to say, or as an open system (de-peg from the dollar) when that supports what he wants to say.

Why Krugman Doesn’t Advise Obama

May 25th, 2009

Here’s another fine bit demonstrating why Obama doesn’t have Krugman as an advisor:

Last week Bill Gross of Pimco, the giant bond fund, warned that the U.S. government may lose its AAA debt rating in a few years, thanks to the trillions it’s spending to rescue the economy and the banks. Is that a real possibility?

Well, in a rational world Mr. Gross’s warning would make no sense. America’s projected deficits may sound large, yet it would take only a modest tax increase to cover the expected rise in interest payments — and right now American taxes are well below those in most other wealthy countries. The fiscal consequences of the current crisis, in other words, should be manageable. - The New York Times

As you can see, Krugman lives in some imaginary world. In the real world, our trillion dollar deficits are leading us to the point where our national debt will EQUAL our GDP, which on its own would be reason to downgrade our debt rating from AAA. This on its own is bad, but the way we finance that debt is worse.

You might think at the current rates treasuries are offered at that there’s no harm in deficit spending. Here are a couple of things to think about. First, most of the debt is due in the short term. Next year when an x-year treausury matures we have to pay it off, and we pay it off by auctioning off more treasuries at whatever rate the market will bear. Simply put, we have an Adjustable Rate National Debt. Second, we won’t be able to sell treasuries as easily. This fall two things happened that allowed us to finance our deficit spending that aren’t likely to occur again. When Lehman collapsed in September and Reserve Primary Fund broke the buck, there was a flight from money market funds to treasuries. The other reason we were able to finance the national debt was the Chinese and other foreign entities, who had a total of $1.3 trillion in Fannie and Freddie debt/”assets”, were drawing down those holdings and transferring them into treasuries.

Add to this the fact that we’re devaluing our currency and you’d be scratching your head as to why we would have a AAA rating in a “rational world”. In March, Dollar Bill Bernanke created over A TRILLION DOLLARS out of thin air to buy $300 billion in U.S. debt* and $750 billion in mortgage securities - and he’s given strong indications that he’s ready to print more money. This is roughly equivalent to stock dilution - so China and Japan have their trillions in U.S. Treasuries but we’ve effectively made them worth less. In effect, we are welshing on our debts, even if we pay them. And the Chinese and every other nation but America knows and admits that.

I’m sure that Krugman is scratching his head as to why reality differs from his theories about massive deficit spending with only positive or no consequences, but that’s exactly the point, and precisely why I’m glad that Obama may invite him to dinner but not let him anywhere near the kitchen.

* Ostensibly to lower interest rates but in reality because the market for treasuries has dried up. Reference Reserve Primary Fund and China’s treasury transfer above.

Who Wrote This?

May 19th, 2009

More and more it seems like the news is a Chinese box - you pass in some information, it performs operations on the information, some information comes out, but there’s nothing inside the box that actually understands Chinese. This is a prime example. A nine month delay in legislation taking effect isn’t a loophole. And who wrote the following bit of genius:

Interest and fees are lenders’ primary sources of profits. So to make up for lost revenue, credit card companies may now have to go after the 45 percent of borrowers who pay their bills on time.

Among the possibilities:

- Reviving annual fees
- Charging interest immediately on purchases instead of offering grace periods
- Eliminating rewards programs

My friends, we all know who wrote that brief snippet: the credit card industry. If the credit card industry actually really truly wanted to stop existing, this would be a wonderful idea. The problem with this nightmare scenario is that, as most people know other than the Chinese box known as the media, credit card companies actually make money when you make a purchase (1-3% of the transaction plus a set fee). As Steve Martin so poignantly put it in The Jerk, “It’s a profit deal!”

If you take every reason that makes a responsible person use a credit card, they’ll do the responsible thing and not use credit cards at all. Following which, the cc companies will lose those merchant fees, and they’ll be stuck with what they have right now - a large amount of bad debt - and nothing else.

Scale

May 6th, 2009

So there’s a leak that Wells Fargo needs $15 billion in capital and at this point I have no idea whether that’s a lot of money or not. Bank of America needs $34 billion? Obama wants to close loopholes to potentially generate and extra $21 billion per year in taxes? $21 billion is a lot of money, obviously it’s not $100 billion but still quite a tidy sum. And yet, $15 billion and $34 billion don’t seem so large any more. If one were to try to satirize excess and portray a thief running away with some ungodly sum, $1 billion would seem paltry. “He robbed the bank and got away with $1 billion? This is interesting because…?”