![]() |
| I lol'd citizens. I lol'd. Found it here |
Salve
Citizens of the Republic and denizens of vir sphaera (manosphere).
I
want this blog to have a wealth of analysis and information; but my work schedule doesn’t give me a whole lot
of time during the week to pump out high quality, well thought out, and insightful
work. I have a bunch of things I want to
write about, and I am slowly collecting the information I need to do so. Reports that shows
we really aren’t as dependent on the Middle East for oil as some pundits
claim. Esoteric writings about what really makes a nation powerful.
And statistical analysis on what really makes a nation wealthy.
I’ll post those, but during the week I think I will also post up an article
that I have read along with my own color commentary. So without further ado here
is an article I read on MSN money this morning:
"For
all the well-paid analysts and sophisticated computer systems that dominate
trading, Wall Street still can't seem to focus on more than one thing at a
time.
For
now, the focus has returned to the European debt crisis, as the issues that cut
down Greece, Portugal and Ireland have hit Spain hard.
But
very soon, as Election Day approaches, the attention will turn back to U.S.
debt and deficit issues, which, as in Spain, are caused by too much debt and a
government trying to avoid its budget-cutting duties. Remember last summer's
debt-ceiling debacle and the market meltdown caused partly by the loss of the
Treasury's AAA credit rating? Get ready for the sequel. (Very true though the loss of our triple A
credit rating to AA whatever was a joke.
Let me ask you this. Would a person, whose total credit card debt
exceeded his income by about 30% or more, qualify for a loan? A few years ago
sure, but nowadays, such actions would and should be considered negligent if
not criminal)
This
time, however, Washington will have to contend not only with its new $16.4
trillion debt ceiling, but with the expiration of a long list of revenue
measures (Bush tax cuts, payroll tax holiday and more) and automatic spending
cuts that add up to a drag on growth of around 4% of the gross domestic
product. (If cutting of a government programs hurt GDP, then was it really
necessary? i.e did that growth really exist? Moreover, why do people forget that it isn't like money is being
flushed down the toilet? It is simply not being distributed by our government
and being kept in the pockets of the people, which is better by the way.
Mises has plenty of articles talking about why this logic is flawed that
you should check out. But to put it succinctly, the money that government puts
towards economic programs do not go to businesses that are healthy, vibrant,
and have good growth prospects. It goes
to old decrepit dinosaurs, that are unable to adapt and change to remain profitable. Rather than innovate they become rent seekers looking to squeeze every bit of revenue they can. Which isn't bad in itself, however, rent seekers, like water, seek the path of least resistance. And that path is government regulation. And when it (money) isn't shifted to the GMs of the world; it is shoveled off
to whatever feel good 'green industry' or gee whiz program, in some cases both like electric cars*, that couldn't
survive in the market without government support. If a company cannot survive without government
support it is a net drain on the economy pure and simple. Trabant anyone? After WWII we significantly cut spending, and for a
brief time the economy contracted. Yet after the reset phase, and when money started
going to productive and profitable sections of the economy instead of our
corpulent Federal programs, the economy took off into a sustained economic
growth spurt. Or if you want an even
more recent example, look at the Solyndra fiasco. $ 500 million in loans from the Feds just disappeared
before our eyes.)
And
unless something is done, it would all happen at once -- risking a new
recession outright, since the International Monetary Fund is looking for the
U.S. economy to expand by only 2.1% this year and 2.4% in 2013. (We are
heading to recession anyways; in fact I would argue we are amidst a depression.
Either we get it done now, or put it off until it is way worse later. Forgive me for getting scatological, but I
have a principle that relates quite well. It is the Cogitans Iuvenis principle
of delayed diarrhea. I will explain it like so: You know when you get that
feeling when your stomach that tells you, that sometime soon, you are going to
have an unpleasant experience in the bathroom?
You know you could get it over with now, but you decide to wait and hope
it goes away, like bad gas, or Lady Gaga, only it doesn't, it never does, it
only gets worse and worse until you finally run into the bathroom, your spchinter bursting at the seams as you barely get your pants undone, and your ass on the toilet as jets of sick leave your anus. You then spend the next fifteen minutes dry crapping and your stomach twisting as it curses you for waiting so long to excrete the bile that festerd in your bowels. If
you had only gone the moment you felt that 'uncomfortable feeling' you would
have gotten it out of the way. But you put it off and made it so much
worse. I am sure you have experienced
this at one time or another; well the reasoning on the economy is largely the
same. If we had only let the crisis of
'08 taken its course we would already have bottomed and entered a new cycle of
economic growth, but 4 years later we are still doing the extend and pretend.)
This
is the "fiscal cliff" Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has been
warning about (I'm more concerned about the fiscal tsunami he is causing
that will be far worse than any quake we are going to experience. Most likely these two events will occur in
tandem and will be on a global scale). It's real. It's coming. And soon, it
will be all that Wall Street's chatterboxes are talking about.
No
more can-kicking
The
problem is that we can no longer avoid the hard fiscal choices we've been
avoiding (Absolutely) -- a topic I've written about
frequently.
We
needed meaningful stimulus to boost short-term growth (No) and slash the
"cyclical" portion of the deficit related to our mediocre recovery
(What?! If our government had a sense of financial responsibility they would have
cut their budgets to minimize whatever 'cyclical' growth would be accrued.).
Not only would more vigorous growth cut the deficit by increasing tax revenues (True
for now, but that doesn't factor in future liabilities like Social Security or
Medicaid that is going to rain hellfire upon us all.) and cutting
expenditures on things like food stamps, Medicaid and unemployment benefits, it
would also clear the way to address the deeper "structural" deficit. (Ok,
let me get this straight. Long term debt is bad, but short term debt is good
right? I get the basic concept that you
can leverage your growth ability by getting loans for projects that have a net
ROI in excess of the loan. It is what we do, well what we should do anyways, in the
commercial real estate industry. However, there are numerous problems with
this simplistic line of thinking. 1)
There is no such thing as short term spending for the government, it all
becomes long term. The near trillion
dollar stimulus was supposed to be short term, however, whenever a politician,
like say Mr. Paul, talks about ending this spending it is called
irresponsible. It belies logic, this
spending was supposed to be temporary, yet four years later it is still
haunting us and has pretty much become just as institutional as say Social
Security or military spending. Now the
author of this article might agree with me on the inanity of this thinking,
however, he is still wrong. Point 2: We are assuming that our spending has an ROI
in excess of the interest we are accruing.
It doesn't. Most of Obamas
stimulus was nothing more than a pork barrel wet dream for every leftwing
community organizer or bureaucratic lifer out there. Sometime in the near future I will break out
how it was spent, but here is a taste. We spent a grand total of 870 million
for small business loans compared to 58 billion given to state governments to
shore up their irresponsible budgets.
Seems kind of back asswards doesn't it.
If the problem we were suffering was a liquidity trap, essentially were
banks will not lend, then wouldn't it have made more sense to open as much
funds as possible to get small businesses going to jump start the economy? No, apparently the way to prosperity is to
make sure no one on the state payroll gets a pay cut or looses their job.)
This
is the real crux of the problem. And there are no easy answers. What do we do
about out-of-control health care costs? Or a bloated Pentagon budget? Or a
share of tax revenue, as a percentage of GDP, that has returned to levels not seen in 60 years? (All true)
The
problem is worsened by demographics. More older Americans and fewer young
workers to support them will put additional strain on the federal budget. (Translation:
Generation Y is screwed.) Any increase in interest rates if the Federal
Reserve loses control of inflation (We've already lost control of inflation,
we have just been able to use our world reserve status as a means to shunt the
effects to other nations. Remember the Arab spring in Egypt? It was in large part caused by the ever
increasing cost of the basics of life.
The original protest in Egypt was about how grain was getting to expensive and it moved from there. This has been going on in China and Latin America as well. Things are getting more expensive because these
developing nations are forced to depreciate their currency so they can keep
their 'competitive advantage' in price so America will keep buying their crap.
Well the problem is that by doing so they are eroding their people’s
ability to purchase the goods that they need.
It will happen here soon
enough.) Will compound the problem via higher payments on existing debt.
It's an untenable position.
The
White House and Congress have had their chance over the last few years to
thread this policy needle, mixing short-term stimulus with medium-term
austerity (This again. It doesn't
work that way for the government.
Anything the government proposes becomes a long term project!) and
essential reforms. Instead, political bloodlust killed any chance of mindful
bipartisanship. (Bipartisanship is the reason we are in this problem)
The recommendations of the Simpson-Bowles deficit commission were ignored, and
the Congressional Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction -- the
"supercommittee" -- simply failed to produce results. (Most of the committe members being nothing more than life long politicians. Evidence being that fix being a pitiful $ 200 billion 'cuts in discretionary spending and other 'cuts' defense procurement and cutting the workforce. Not to mention the laughably fictious idea that they were somehow going to get $ 100 billion in additional tax revenue. Or that they were somehow going to control medicaid costs. We've been trying to do that for decades and we have failed at it.)
A
big part of the reason analysts at Standard & Poor's pulled our AAA rating
back in August was our dysfunctional politics. (As opposed to our government spending money
like a trailer trash lotto winner on chalupas and game of thrones collector edition dvds?) Democrats and Republicans didn't
address the issues. And they didn't merely kick the can down the road -- they
held all of us hostage to 11th-hour brinkmanship as the debt ceiling approached
to score points with far-left and the far-right extremists. (No they did
this to scare sacks like you.
How is raising the debt ceiling good for us. Especially when they pick
the limit the same way most Americans pick lotto numbers. Isn't raising the debt ceiling kind of like
saying we are going to default? I mean,
if the debt ceiling is not raised then we would have been completely unable to
borrow right? If we cannot borrow we
either cannot fund our government programs, not like that’s a bad thing, or we
cannot make our interest payments. Who
do you think they are going to screw over right now? Are they going to screw over the voters, who
can kick the out of office, or the bond holders, many of whom are foreigners?
Makes those ten year T-bills with a return rate less than inflation look even
better now huh? It's like Melvin getting a loan back from Carlos to pay back
Vinney. If he can't get that loan then Vinny isn’t gonna get his money.
Moreover, guess where most of this debt is going to come from? You!
That's right. The largest buyer of our debt isn't foreigners but the
Federal Reserve. They are going to print
the money to buy this debt, inflating the money supply, decreasing your
standard of living while probably increasing our nominal taxable value and just
generally fucking you in the ass.)
You
see, after years of fiscal irresponsibility, we face an inescapable dilemma: We
fly off the fiscal cliff, cutting the deficit by crushing the economy and, like
Europe now, repeating the mistakes of the 1937 Great Depression double-dip (The
great depression would have been over sooner if we just had left the markets
alone); or we swerve, keep our tax cuts and benefits but watch in horror as
a lingering deficit doubles the national debt over the next 10 years.
(Keynesian)
Economic
research suggests both higher debt and deep short-term austerity limit economic
growth (Austrian economics says this line of thinking is irrational). So
we can pick our poison. You want the hurt now or later? (Considering that
rampant government spending is just setting us up for another bubble and
following my rule on the delayed diarrhea principle, I'd take my poison
now. The sooner we get this junk out of
our system the sooner we can get real economic growth."
I remember my freshman economics class, taught by a Keynesian of course, and one thing he said to our class remains very salient. He drew a classic GDP chart and said that government intervention and the federal reserve had been able to decrease the severity and the length of recessions. At the time it made sense to me. Individuals learn from past mistakes and put in regulations and practices to help us in the future, boy was I foolish. Most people do not learn from past mistakes, I am looking at you ex-girlfriend from college, and take little note of history. What is happening to us is really no different than what is happening to Japan, yet these learned men will scrap and prod until they find a superficial difference upon which they can say "This is what caused it, we are different, we didn't/ or did do this." Our government acted exactly as my professor and all the economists said a government should act, flood the system with money and act decisively. That was four years ago and things are little better. I wonder now what my econ professor would say to justify his now disprove statement?
If he says we didn't do enough then I am tempted to call our to the lictors to have him banished from the grand forum.
Your Fellow Citizen,
Cogitans Iuvenis
* I have driven electrics cars. It is very cool, and sometime in the future they will become widespread, but I can assure you it is still far too early in the process. Nothing sucks more than to have your car running out of power trying to find one of the few and far between charging stations only to pass 4 or 5 gas stations. And then knowing that if you do find a charging station your stuck for a couple of hours anyways.

No comments:
Post a Comment
Disagreements and countervailing views are welcome, however, comments will be deleted if:
-They have emoticons.
-If it is obvious that you have not read the post.
-Obvious Spam.