Ideas For Getting The Economy Back On Track

Posted by jerry as finance, politics

I was driving my family to lunch yesterday when my 8 year old son asked “Dad, why are so many stores going out of business?”.  I thought for a second and gave him an 8 year old appropriate view of what has happened.  As I was talking to him, I couldn’t help but think that he is living through what may well turn into the second great depression.

A lot of insanity has transpired lately.  We have seen an unprecedented level of government intervention trying to stop the economic bleeding.  The US has declared handfuls of companies “too big to fail”.  The US was already spending hundreds of billions of dollars on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, now nearly a trillion dollars more to save some key companies.

With all of that in mind, here are my humble ideas for getting the US back on track:

Stop spending so much damn money

1. Discontinue the practice of injecting money into troubled companies.

Instead, let bankruptcy work the way it is designed to.  In extreme cases, facilitate an orderly unwinding of a dying company, such as AIG.

GM does not need $25B from the US to stay afloat.  It needs to fundamentally restructure itself.  This is what chapter 11 bankruptcy is for.  It is possible, even likely, that one or two of the “big three” will not emerge from bankruptcy.  Yes, it will be a terrible set back for the economy, but it is inevitable.  The US automakers have been slowly dying for decades now.

2. End the Iraq and Afghanistan wars to save money

3. Unwind a majority of the new, post 9/11 surveillance infrastructure and foreigner harassment programs to save money and start making the US a world travel destination again

Leverage the savings from 1 through 3 above to establish the following programs:

4. Establish a program to offer new mortgages at a rate of 4% for a set period of time

The near nationalization of the US banking system, and having Freddi and Fannie in a conservitorship should make this possible.  Note that I am not recommending the relaxing of lending requirements.

We do not want to try to re-inflate the housing bubble, but at the same time, the broken and dysfunctional state of housing is likely to be the weight that carries us in to another depression.

5. Establish a series of large scale, nation wide programs to address specific infrastructure issues, such as bridges, water distribution, or power.

For some reason, economic stimulus in the US has to come in the form of a check from the government.  I think that is a fundamentally bad approach to the problem it’s trying to solve.

I generally identify myself as a Libertarian, and some of these ideas are uncomfortable to me, but in many ways, the direction has already been set, now we have to find a way to undo the damage and get back on the right track.

How are you preparing for Gustav?

Posted by jerry as news, politics

I was glued to my TV and computer 3 years ago when Katrina hit, and watched the disastrous aftermath unfold.  What struck me, other than the incompetence of managing the situation at every level of government, was the sheer futility of a inhabiting New Orleans.    So, as we watch this storm lining up to deal NOLA a blow through it’s still unrepaired levees, we have politicians announcing that the country stands beside the people of New Orleans.  After I tired of the spectacle of Katrina, I started to resent New Orleans.  Residents and officials have known for decides, if not hundres of years, that New Orleans is in a precarious place.

Read the rest of this entry »

Iran’s decision to trade oil in Euros instead of dollars

Posted by jerry as finance, politics

Iran announced that it is now trading oil Euros instead of dollars. The weakness in the dollar is cited as a primary reason, though it is understood that the growing tension between the US and Iran is probably a key factor as well.

The general reaction I have seen is: “Holy Crap!”. But, I have to wonder: what is the real impact of doing such a thing, from any side? Oil is a fungible commodity. Currencies are traded on the market. Oil sold in Euros is still convertable to the current exchange rate to dollars. So, someone who wants to buy a million barrels of oil from Iran has to convert $120M to 75M Euro before conducting the transaction? That does sound grave. I suppose the net effect is that Iran will be holding $80B less US dollars per year. Since NO US institution can transact business with the Iran anyhow, Iran is most likely having to exchange them for Euros, Yen or some other currency before doing anything meaningful with it anyhow.

I suspect the risk is that the whole oil market will eventually follow suit. With the recent behavior of the US, that seems likely, but I still have to wonder: will we care?

Securing Adolescents From Exploitation-Online (SAFE) Act

Posted by jerry as politics, technology

The US House of Representatives passed the SAFE act by a 409 to 2 margin.  It also appears likely to pass the senate.  It is interesting to note that one of the 2 “nay” votes on the bill was none other than Ron Paul.  While I agree with his decision to vote against the bill, it will certainly come back to bite him.  “How can you be in favor of exploiting children, Mr. Paul?” 

On the surface, the bill appears to be a draconian measure placed on ISPs, web hosts, public wifi provders, etc, requiring them to report all instances where child pornography is transmitted over their network to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.  The penalty for non-compliance is $150,000US for a first offense, and $300,000 for subsequent offenses.  Complying with the law provides civil and criminal immunity from any resulting legal issues of the disclosure.  That’s about the extent of what is being reported in most of the alarmist media.

If you ACTUALLY READ THE BILL, you will notice this interesting section:

`(f) Protection of Privacy- Nothing in this section shall be construed to require an electronic communication service provider or a remote computing service provider to–

•   `(1) monitor any user, subscriber, or customer of that provider;

•   `(2) monitor the content of any communication of any person described in paragraph (1); or

•   `(3) affirmatively seek facts or circumstances described in subsection (a)(2).

Very interesting.  So, the law doesn’t require the providers to proactively monitor traffic.  So, what does it do then? 

Providers that use technology to determine if someone is viewing an inappropriate site – from a known list of sites or from some form of intelligent analysis of the image content – they are compelled to report such traffic to the NCMEC.  If a web hosting company discovers that a customer is hosting child porn, the hoster must report it.

The other important aspect of the law is what must be reported.  Essentially all identifiable info that is know must be submitted, presumably in an attempt to track back to the owner.

In some respects, this bill just makes something that’s illegal even more illegal.  The bill does add some additional mechanisms to find the child pornographers, distributers and those that view it, and does not appear to place a major burden on providers. 

The downside, as usual, is in the interpretation of child porn.  It’s interesting that a definition of “child pornography” is not included in the bill, yet many other things like “web site”, are.  It is conceivable, as some reports of the bill contend, that clothed children in lascivious poses could constitute child porn.  I wonder how the average Abercrombie & Fitches catalog would fare?

Kucinich and Paul make a good team?

Posted by jerry as politics

This interview with Dennis Kucinich’s lovely & intelligent wife:

Has moderates on both sides quite excited. Unfortunately, it can’t be. There are a few major obstacles:

1. Neither appears to be on a trajectory to win their respective party primary race.
2. Someone has to be VP. It’s unlikely that, though they are close on many issues, certain ideologies like abortion, will prevent each from playing second seat to the other.
3. Either Paul or Kucinich would likely lose the support of their party should they win the primary and choose a running mate from the opposing party, rather than from the “talent pool” from their own party.

I agree, that it would be a great presidency. There would be balance and sanity in the White House, but we are teeing up for another 4 years of craziness.

Conservatives Honing Gaydar?

Posted by jerry as politics

Given all of the wacky antics our conservative leadership has been, well, participating in, this, taken from Conservapedia is pretty funny:

Make no mistake, it’s clearly been “stuffed” by someone out to “bone” the repubs, but funny none-the-less.

Electotainment

Posted by jerry as news, politics

I just finished reading this article and have to respond.  The author doesn’t directly come out and say it, but is basically accusing the new media of dumbing down the political process, and we, the electorate are the victims.  We are NOT the victims… We are the cause.  Have you seen what’s on TV lately?  What are the most popular shows?  American Idol, Dancin with the Stars, reality show dejure.  The media is pavlov’s dog, and the public has been in control of the bell for a long time.  They are the monster the WE made. 

It isn’t that CNN doesn’t want to let loose Hillary’s view on Yucca Mountain!  CNN doesn’t want a million people saying “oh my god, this is boring shit.  Lets see what’s on Fox News.  Maybe there’s a police chase or a good apartment fire we can watch.”  And they’re right.  I may be interested in Hillary’s view on Yucca Mountain, the credit collapse, the slowing economy, what to do with Iran, but I represent a small minority that probably doesn’t fit into their demographic anyway. 

Up till recently, I hadn’t watched CNN or Fox News in about 2 years.  I was really bothered by what I saw when I did have a chance to watch it recently.  Every news show on CNN Headline News is presented by a “commentator”, not a reporter.  I could not believe that was Headline News.  It used to actually be 24 hours of an anchor person giving the news.  But, they’ve adapted to what the viewers want. 

 For pete’s sake, PLEASE STOP BLAMING THE MEDIA.  They’re doing what they do best – sell advertising.  They can’t sell advertising if no one watches their programming because “hard hitting journalism” can’t compete with Dancin with the Stars. 

Can Ron Paul be elected?

Posted by jerry as politics

The answer is: I don’t think so.  I’ve grown to equate the presidential selection process with the top 3 videos on each week’s edition of “America’s Funniest Home Videos”.  You sit and watch the show, and at the end, the producers pick three videos which will be voted on to determine the winner of $10,000, but the videos that are picked are typically lame and definitely not the funniest of the show, but the audience is forced to vote among that set.

The presidential race is not entirely different.  We sit and watch a lot of really interesting candidates, but in the end, we’ll end up having to choose from a select few that the “producers” have hand picked for us – Guiliani &  Romney on one side, Clinton and Obama on the other side.  The media is really the group that determines who gets to play and who doesn’t.  I don’t believe that they have a hidden agenda, are working as part of some covert society, or the like, just that they all want to focus on who they think are going to be the top contenders. In the process, they impact the outcome of the races.

 I was looking at the Ron Paul Money Bomb, and they have a great list of Ron Paul “commandments”:

01. End the Patriot Act Immediately.
02. End the IRS.
03. End the Homeland Security Department.
04. End the Iraq Police Action.
05. End the private ownership of the Federal Reserve.
06. End the national ID Card program.
07. End the sending of jobs overseas.
08. End the flood of illegal immigrants.
09. End preemptive military strikes.
10. End the “future” police state.(a)(b)
11. End nation building & defend OUR nation, not others.
12. End executive war powers. Congress alone can declare War.
13. End the North American Union. Preserve US sovereignty.
14. End the War on terror. Terror is not tangible. Therefore it cannot be won [EVER].
15. End the onslaught of our freedoms and liberties by the Federal Government.

 I definitely want to see most of these put into place.  They are all noble and sensible, but there is so much inertia behind almost all of them, that even if Paul were to be elected, I have no confidence that any of them could be accomplished.  However, there is value in slowing down the course that we’re on, so it might not be all bad. 

In the end, I believe the contortion of Paul’s views by opponents and media, such as abortion and affirmative action, will be his undoing.  I share them, but they will inevitably come across as “minority hating”, “women hating”, etc, even if that’s not the case.

Growing dissent of Ron Paul

Posted by jerry as politics

It’s been interesting watching the groundswell of support for Paul over the past year.  His republican affiliation and anti-war, pro-liberty beliefs are very appealing to many who feel the current administration has been assaulting all that is American.  But now, people are starting to realize that he is a conservative libertarian.  As a libertarian, he has views that the federal government should not be in the education business, it should not be mandating racial quotas or bailing out municipalities after disasters.

I find it really funny that the author of the article in question is clearly anti-Iraq war, yet wants the US to go in and kick some butt in Darfur. Ron Paul’s position is that we don’t go to war unless the threat is against us.  See, it’s a consistent view.

It should also not be suprising that he attempts to pass legislation to stop abortions.  He is, after all, a conservative.  Protecting the lives of a countries citizens is one of the core tenants of a libertarian, so that would appear to be in the perview of the federal government.  You can debate the issue of whether or not a fetus is a life, but in his eyes, at least, it’s clear and he is fighting for what he believes is right.  I’m personally pro-women’s choice, but he isn’t.  His philosophy aligns with mine in many other key areas, though. 

Paul’s desire to do away with the Department of Education is being taken as a anti-education stance.  I can’t believe that for a minute.  I do believe that his stance is that education is a State and local affair, and that the Federal government only screws things up.  History, since the creation of the DoEd, seems to back up his view.

Likewise, hiw view that affirmative action should be abolished is taken as an anti-minority stance.  Again, I can’t believe that is his intent.  Like me, I believe his intent is that discrimination should not be tolerated, and when found, should be prosecuted, but federally mandated minority quotas are not appropriate.

Paul’s view that the Federal government should not have provided aid for Katrina victims is also a hot button. Again, his view is likely not that the people should be assisted at all, just that the federal government is not the right group to do so.  The states  themselves should be doing this sort of thing.

So, in short, it seems that many people are awakening to Paul’s conservative views, and “jumping off the Ron Paul bandwagon”, which will ensure that we continue to have many more years of the same kind of crap that we’ve been experiencing up to now – continued erosion of liberty, increasing our military activities abroad, bigger deficits, more taxes, lower currency value, and on and on.  Good luck with that.  Glad you’re love of the federal programs is worth the complete destruction of the US.

Nukes…

Posted by jerry as World, politics

Just read this article on reddit, and my head is about to explode.  The author clearly writes with an authoritative air about military operations, and seems to have his shit straight with a believable story.  Trouble is, it’s got holes.

The author makes a reference to “central command” several times.  Anyone at all intimate with US military strategy understands that central command is located in Doha, Quatar, not in the Pentagon, and would not be governing the movement of nuclear weapons in the US.  That job would either fall to United States Transportation Command or to United States Strategic Command.  I really am not sure which in this particular case.

What concerns me is that this is a really good story written with a seemingly good handle on military protocol.  Yet, a basic fact like that is wrong, so what does that say about the rest of the article?  Probably not much if you really really hate Dick Cheney.  Speaking of which, I have yet to understand how good ole Dick has obtained so much control over the military as to be able to single handedly oder the shipment of nuclear weapons to a war front.  Maybe he does, but call me skeptical.

When I heard the story originally, my first thought was that of propoganda – not a mistake or any kind of internal struggle.  This administration is extrodinarily effective at managing the media, if you can say nothing else for them.  I have to believe that whatever the “real” plan is, it involved letting Iran/Syria/whoever else know that we had nuclear weapons en-route to their back door at one point, and that was just on accident.  “Just wait and see what happens when we get mad!”.  I still think that’s a pretty likely scenario.