Archive for May, 2010
US Deficit-Debt and the European Debt Quiz
Posted by Tom in Deficit, Economics, Europe, Financial Crisis, Financial Policy, Humor, Monetary Policy, National Debt on May 27, 2010
It’s rare to see a thoughtful economic comment in the liberal NYT, but David Einhorn penned one yesterday with Easy Money, Hard Truths. In it he suggests that our grandchildren will not need to face the day of reckoning caused by our unmanageable deficits and debt simply because we will face it ahead of them. The future, though, is no less grim for them.
“Public sector jobs used to offer greater job security but lower pay. Not anymore. In 2008, according to the Cato Institute, the average federal civilian salary with benefits was $119,982, compared with $59,909 for the average private sector worker; the disparity has grown enormously over the last decade.
“The question we need to ask is this: If we don’t change direction, how long can we travel down this path without having a crisis? The answer lies in two critical issues. First, how long will the capital markets continue to finance government borrowings that may be refinanced but never repaid on reasonable terms? And second, to what extent can obligations that are not financed through traditional fiscal means be satisfied through central bank monetization of debts — that is, by the printing of money?”
A rather humorous take on the question is given by a couple of Aussie satirists, John Clarke and Bryan Dawe, who take on a timely quiz show Q&A on the European debt crisis.
Remember those last words, “laughing as you sink!”
Gabriella Stands Up For Immigration Sanity In Arizona
Posted by Tom in Constitution, Immigration, National Character on May 27, 2010
A beautiful naturalized US citizen stands up for Arizona’s immigration law.
Did You Really Think Your Investment in “Solyndra” Was a Good One?
Posted by Tom in Deficit, Economics, Energy Facts & Policies, Stimulus/Bailout on May 26, 2010
Didn’t know you invested in Solyndra? Well if your if you are one of that small class of current taxpayers, or you have children, or grandchildren who will be smothered by Obamadebt, you have indeed invested in Solyndra.
You should perhaps know a few facts about Solyndra: It is a solar-panel manufacturer in Fremont, California. It has a new partially constructed facility that will provide 3000 temporary construction jobs in Fremont and it is expected to provide 1000 production jobs. It has accumulated debt of $557 million and paid for the new plant with $535 million of last year’s $787 billion stimulus package. Oh, by the why, Price Waterhouse & Coopers the auditor questions its ability “to continue as a going concern.”
Now, do you expect an equity return on that investment? That is a return commensurate with the high risk nature of the investment? You shouldn’t because while you have supplied the bulk of the capital it is in the form of debt. If anything you will get a debt return despite your equity type risk. The real return if any is ever made will go to the equity investors.
Now, a couple more facts: The sun doesn’t always shine on solar panels. To date solar panel generated electricity needs taxpayer subsidy to make any economic sense whatsoever. (So you and yours will also subsidize Solyndra’s customers, for which you will only get billed!) And, I saved the best for last: Hussein Obama visited Solyndra’s plant today, as an adjunct to his trip to generate bucks for Barbara Boxer’s senate campaign. (See: Debra Saunders’s The Obama Mantra: Bill, Baby, Bill in the May 27th RCP.)
Still feel good about that investment?
Blumenthal Didn’t ‘Misspeak.’ He Lied
Posted by kyle in Politics, Uncategorized on May 26, 2010
Sidney Blumenthal did not ‘misspeak’ when he claimed on numerous occasions that he served in Vietnam. He lied. And he lied repetitively.
No honorable person, especially someone who did serve but who did not serve in Vietnam, would ever claim to having been in country if he or she had not been. There’s long been an unwritten but absolutely inviolate rule for Vietnam era servicemen that you don’t go anywhere near such a claim.
I’m proud of my service to my country as a USAF officer and flight examiner from 1970-1975 (EC-135 Navigator, 4th Airborne Command Control Squadron, Strategic Air Command), but our war was the Cold War and we never went anywhere near Vietnam. In the ensuing thirty-five years, whenever I’m asked about my service I go out of my way to let people know I was never in Vietnam. I know of no other veteran who would ever consider saying otherwise. It’s just something that you instinctively know would be an egregious violation of your own integrity and a horrible disservice to the men and women who were actually in harm’s way.
Blumenthal not only has lied about being in country, according to the New York Times story that outed him on this, on no less than five occasions he took action to avoid going to Vietnam.
When the New York Times goes after a liberal, particularly a self-promoting liberal, then is joined by the likes of ‘thrill up my leg’ Chris Matthews, who absolutely launched on Blumenthal, you know the man is unworthy of any position of public trust.
Incompetent Administration Condemns Arizona…
Posted by Tom in Constitution, Entitlements, Homeland Security, Humor, Immigration on May 23, 2010
…but none of these idiots has read its immigration law!
Now the New York Post has a suggestion for these logically challenged idiots: “The Mexico model.” Some highlights: “Asked Wolf Blitzer: “If people want to come [into Mexico] from Guatemala or Honduras or El Salvador or Nicaragua, they can just walk in?” “No,” responded Calderon. “They need to fulfill a form. They need to establish their right name. We analyze if they [don’t have] a criminal [record].” “Do Mexican police go around asking for papers of people they suspect are illegal immigrants?” asked Blitzer.“Of course,” said Calderon. “If somebody sneaks in from Nicaragua or some other country in Central America,” continued Blitzer, “they wind up in Mexico, they can go get a job?” “No, no,” Calderon replied. “If somebody [does] that without permission, we send back — we send them back.”
Then Hussein Obama’s number one on homeland security suggests that the Obama administration will refuse to enforce the U.S. law: “At week’s end, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano was backing up the head of the Immigration and Customs Service — who said that he might not deport illegals detained under that statute. “ICE has the legal discretion to accept or not to accept persons delivered to it by non-federal personnel,” said Napolitano. “It also has the discretion to deport or not to deport.”
Read more:
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/editorials/the_mexico_model_2DyxJuFroueHqDGXMzB04K#ixzz0oo6JfueS
We do not enforce our own laws. When Arizona enforces them we condemn and boycott the state without reading the law. We are bankrupting our boarder states and nation by granting the rights of U.S. citizens to non-U.S. illegals! What’s wrong with this picture?
Two Hypocritical Presidents
Posted by Tom in Defense, Homeland Security, Immigration on May 21, 2010
Hussein Obama continues to denigrate and debase America. The latest, he stood side by side with Felipe Calderon and and joined in Calderon’s criticism of the Arizona law that authorizes enforcement of U.S. law on illegal entry into the U.S. He is a hypocrite because the U.S statute which he has not enforced is more susceptible to profiling than the Arizona law. Calderon is a hypocrite because the Mexican law on illegal entry is worse than the U.S. law in terms of its harsh application. But to stand by Calderon’s side while Calderon demeans one of these United States is unforgivable for any American president.
William Bennett and Seth Leibsohn have an excellent article on the subject in NRO: “Allowing the running down of a part of the United States by the head of a foreign government, at the White House, standing next to the president — who not only didn’t challenge him, but encouraged him — is a foreign- and domestic-policy catastrophe. And in any catastrophe, one has to ask what were the conditions or causes that led to such a thing. Did the president tell Mr. Calderón ahead of time it would be okay to blast away at Arizona, which is to blast away at the United States? Or, less likely, was nothing said ahead of time and Mr. Calderón simply took note of the administration’s statements about Arizona thus far? Or, had Mr. Calderón simply observed over the past year not only President Obama and his administration’s take-down of Arizona but President Obama’s other attitudes about America, such as his bowing to foreign leaders and his calling America “arrogant,” “dismissive,” and “derisive” of our allies?
“There are nearly half a million illegal immigrants in Arizona. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, while illegal immigrants make up 9 percent of the Arizona population, they are responsible for 22 percent of the felonies in Arizona and they constitute 11 percent of the state prison population. Arizona is now the kidnapping capital of the United States, and Phoenix has the second-largest kidnapping problem in the world (second to Mexico City).”
“According to the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, kidnapping in Arizona increased 402 percent between 2004 and 2008, with almost 70 percent of the kidnapping cases submitted for prosecution involving illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants account for 16.5 percent of those sentenced for violent crimes; 18.5 percent of those sentenced for property crimes; 33.5 percent of those sentenced for the manufacture, sale, or transport of drugs; and 44.4 percent of those sentenced or forgery and fraud in the Phoenix area. And, according to DOJ statistics, three Border Patrol agents are assaulted on the average day at or near the U.S. border. Someone is kidnapped every 35 hours in Phoenix, Ariz. — mostly by agents of alien-smuggling organizations. And one in five American teenagers last year used some type of illegal drug, many of which were imported across the unsecured U.S.-Mexico border. For example, most of the cocaine and meth consumed in America comes in from Mexico, and in some states, over 90 percent of the marijuana consumed is from Mexico.”
There is a compelling interest for the Arizona law because there is no adequate enforcement of the federal law nor adequate security of our Mexican boarder. Perhaps that’s why a majority of Americans agree with the Arizona position according to a recent Fox News Poll.
Super Power to Super Wimp
Posted by Tom in Defense, Diplomacy, Foreign Policy, Military Policy, National Character on May 20, 2010
How weak can we be? Charles Krauthhammer answers the question in today’s NRO post, The Fruits of Weakness. The Iran-Brazil-Turkey nuclear deal is a ruse. Iran retains more than enough enriched uranium to make the nuclear bomb and continues accelerated enrichment. Even the French say the deal will help Iran continue its nuclear program. The joint hands up photo is the collective finger to the weak Hussein Omama.
“That picture — a defiant, triumphant “take that” to Uncle Sam — is a crushing verdict on the Obama foreign policy. It demonstrates how rising powers, traditional American allies, having watched thisadministration in action, have decided that there’s no cost to lining up with America’s enemies and no profit in lining up with a U.S. president given to apologies and appeasement.”
Iran Obama overtures and appeasements rejected, Obama acquiescence to Russia’s reformation of its USSR sphere of influence, Obama appeasement of Syria even as it tightens its grip on Lebanon, are all examples of our weakness, our desire to withdraw and disarm.
“This is not just an America in decline. This is an America in retreat — accepting, ratifying, and declaring its decline, and inviting rising powers to fill the vacuum.”
“Given Obama’s policies and principles, Turkey and Brazil are acting rationally. Why not give cover to Ahmadinejad and his nuclear ambitions? As the U.S. retreats in the face of Iran, China, Russia, and Venezuela, why not hedge your bets? There’s nothing to fear from Obama and everything to gain by ingratiating yourself with America’s rising adversaries. After all, they actually believe in helping one’s friends and punishing one’s enemies.”
You Pay While Musicians Play With Free Health Care!
Posted by Tom in Deficit, Democrats, Nationalized Health Care on May 20, 2010
Comrade Nancy Pelosi is really a socialist, and one who likes music, to wit:
U.S. Foreign Policy: Provocative Weakness
Posted by Tom in Diplomacy, Foreign Policy, Military Policy, National Character, Terrorism on May 19, 2010
Our kudos and thanks go out to Herman Pirchner, Jr. President of the American Foreign Policy Council in Washington DC for an excellent presentation and discussion last evening on America’s foreign policy. Herman took us around the world with using radical islam as the unifying link. It was truly enlightening and very sobering to hear his observations. Among them:
- Russia is extending its “sphere of influence” toward former satellites to counter radical islam and re-assert itself by keeping the U.S. off balance in the Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan. In some respects our interest are aligned like controlling radical islam, and in others they are opposed like reforming the white USSR.
- China is due for a generational change that leaves a big question-mark. Unlike the current leadership which grew amid the turmoil of the cultural revolution, the next generation is being raised in relative wealth and security and being educated in the best universities around the world. It thus understands world values. China is the only major nation without a significant islamic population.
- Europe will have a majority islamic population within two generations. Already there are community pockets of society governed by Shia law. There is a distinct possibility that Europe will break apart financially.
- Israel is gravely at risk since the U.S. has permitted Iran to go nuclear. The odds are against its survival.
- Arab world nations fear Persian hegemony and will thus arm themselves with nuclear weapons.
U.S. foreign policy under Hussein Obama has been one of being nice rather than right. We have given up numerous positions without getting anything in return. We have shown ourselves to be weak, frustrating our allies and emboldening our enemies. We are inviting trouble in both aspects.
The doctrine of “provocative weakness” enunciated by Fritz Kraemer in the Nixon years is that the only effective foreign policy was one backed by the realistic threat of using military force to achieve its goals; the failure to use this realistic threat was a provocative invitation to our enemies to use aggression against us. This variation of Teddy Roosevelt’s “speak softly and carry a big stick” is antithetical to Hussein Obama’s administration. Obama is disarming and withdrawing from defensive alliances. He relies on bowing, scraping, apologizing and addressing dictators like Chavez as “mi amigo.” Here’s a picture to refresh memories:
Yes, provocative weakness is Obama’s order of the day!
One chilling observation brought up during the discussion was that the radical islamic version of Islam was more true to the Koran than the secular, passivists’ version. In either version the goal is to conquer non-believers and convert them either peacefully by out populating them or violently with the sword as Mohamed did from Medina. So we will see more September 11ths. Obama has invited them.
Again we wish to thank Herman Pirchner for the excellent presentation and discussion.
Unions and Human Nature
When read that Andy Stern head of the SEIU one of the largest public employee unions is retiring from his $306,388 -a-year job and is likely to be replaced by one of many high paid union bosses, I question the need for unions, particularly the public employee variety.
The days of sweat shops, 12-hour days and child labor have long since passed. Admittedly, industrial unions served an important social purpose. Working conditions and job safety have dramatically improved as a result of their efforts. Those improvements have beed legally codified long ago.
On the public employee side of the workforce no such social ills or physical dangers prevailed. The supposed “evil” for public employment was the “spoils” system: to the victor goes the spoils. When the city hall changed hands politically, so did its workforce. This enabled machine politics to prevail with ward bosses calling the shots from New York to Kansas City. The “reform” here was the civil service system in which competence and merit assured job security.
So what do unions do today? In my opinion, they promote mediocrity. They create work to create new members. They create fat cat union bosses. And, they foster “rent-seeking” behavior by attaching themselves to politicians who are more than willing to trade laws and regulations favorable to unions for membership money and membership votes.
- Mediocrity: All of us are equal thus it would be wrong for some of us to try to excel, do a better job, be more efficient, work smarter and faster. Lets all be the same because in numbers there is strength. So let’s not resent the slackers, let’s keep our mouth shut about our fellow worker who knows how to “work the system.”
- Make work: The more work there is the more workers that are needed. That means more potential union members, more dues and more pay for the bosses and more money for compliant politicians.
- Union Bosses: Guys like Andy Stern are the ultimate salesmen. They separate union members from their money and big money it can be. What benefit do the union members get for those dues? Not much.
- Political Symbiosis: The unholy alliance between fat cat union bosses and fat cat politicians is well chronicled. It’s self perpetuating. Who pays the price? The union members and the public.
My take, unions harm their members and society in general. Mediocrity is not in the fiber of human nature. In fact it is opposite the natural human spirit to compete and excel. We strive to better ourselves. Nor is the unfairness implicit in mediocrity part of human nature. We strive to be just. We resent slackers we resent the inability to demonstrate our excellence. Likewise we tend to resent the waste implicit in union make work programs and featherbedding; in a general sense human nature is economic. Human nature is indeed social but it is also naturally competitive and just.
Would excellent teachers favor merit pay? Do they favor keeping notorious deadwood on the job simply because the deadwood belongs to the union. Would union members prefer to make or not make political contributions on their own rather than have the union bosses decide where the money goes? Do union members like being told how to vote?
As a young man working my way through school I was a card carrying member at different times of three building trade unions. The work was good as was the pay, but the pace was regulated be other members. I can remember being told to slow down! Older now, I have a broader perspective about unions effect on our society, our government and our economy. To see fat cat Andy Stern plunk down $60 million to put Barack Hussein Obama into the White House really turns my stomach.
Reform is needed particularly in the public employee sector and part of that reform is to expose the fat cat union bosses and how their interest differ for the interests of the membership.