Thursday, January 22, 2015

Thursday, January 22, 2015

CAN ANYONE REFUTE THESE STATS? Why is the government ever allowed to control the statistics generated by the economy. For sure both Dems and Repubs are incentivized to skew numbers to make them look good and stay in office.  This is wrong.  At the very least there should be an independent auditing function built into the system to control this abuse.

HERE'S A STORY WORTH WATCHING This murder was highly suspicious and unusually timely. Something big going on here.

FOR A RATIONAL MIND AT WORK, READ THIS The words of a true conservative and a rational mind at work.

SAVING FOR HISTORICAL PURPOSES It will be fun to see where this ends up.

THE FACE OF THE DEMOCRAT PARTY This could all happen. And you thought Obama was a bad leader?

HERE'S THE EXPLANATION OF A TRUE BELIEVING KEYNESIAN.

-Paul Krugman, March 11, 2012
What we had in 2008 was a financial panic. When the government allowed Lehman Brothers to fail, suddenly faith in the integrity of the entire financial system tottered, and the entire fragile edifice came crashing down at once. When the anemic 2009 stimulus (barely passed in the face of vehement Republican opposition) provided a floor below which the economy would sink no further, that action was not viewed by many as the correct strategy to prevent further devastation, but perversely, as the action which caused said devastation.*
The huge cuts in state spending, followed by the sequester, resulted in de facto austerity for the US. This was incredibly damaging. The problem was a temporary lack of demand, not a lack of productivity. Although the financial services sector of the economy needed reform, the rest of the economy was quite strong. Instead of a normal recession and recovery, ignorance and political tribalism doomed us to a long Great Recession, and the worst economy since the 1930s.
Macro economics is not kitchen table economics. When everyone in the country cut their spending at once, it endangered everyone else's income.
We needed stimulus spending during the crisis, and fiscal belt-tightening only afterpositive growth was well established. The benefits of that positive growth not only provide a good value for every stimulus dollar spent, it also mitigates the problem of the existing debt (more growth = higher tax receipts). Sacrificing stimulus in favor of austerity only increases the relative size of the debt hole we find ourselves in.
Furthermore, despite quantitative easing, we now find ourselves skirting very close to stagflation. This is due in large part to the desire of people around the globe to park their money in US Treasuries despite the fact that, due to zero bound interest rates, they're actually losing money on our debt. Think about that. We could be using all those no interest loans to be repairing our crumbling infrastructure and creating huge numbers of jobs and stimulating the entire economy. Instead we're throwing it into tax cuts for the wealthy. Those infrastructure projects will need doing someday anyway, and it's utterly inevitable that they will then cost far more than they would have at any time during the past 6 years, when low demand and high capacity in the construction industry would have made such projects an historic bargain.
Now the real question is, why would the same people who have consistently gotten this drastically wrong ever have their ill-formed opinions taken seriously ever again? The answer to that is too depressing to even address here.
* One of the few statements of which it can be said that a broad consensus exists among leading economists is that the 2009 stimulus halted the free fall of the US economy. If you still find yourself arguing this point, well, you just might be a big dumb idiot. Sorry about that. At least you'll have lots of company.

Sunday, January 4, 2015

Sunday, January 4, 2015

It helps to remember these voters-to-be are law-breakers, here illegally.HERE'S OBAMA ANC CO. STRATEGY

TURKEY IS A COUNTRY OF CONTRADICTIONSAnd Erdogan is an erratic leader. Seems to be for free markets but opposed to civic freedoms.

IT'S COMING TO THIS: The damage this administration had done will take many moons to repair, if ever.

THERE ARE MANY FORMS OF CORPORATE CORRUPTION.  THIS ONE REFLECTS POORLY ON MANAGEMENT.

Want to avoid being called a racist? Pay Al Sharpton

POSTED AT 6:31 PM ON JANUARY 4, 2015 BY JAZZ SHAW

Have you ever wondered how Al Sharpton sorts through all of the many racial crisis management situations in the country and decides where and when the attention of his National Action Network will be focused? The New York Post has been doing some digging and found that there’s more than a little method to the madness. Whether it is cash or influence, it appears that if you have a corporation or organization looking to do business and you don’t want to be singled out and identified as a racist, you can cut a deal with Reverend Al.
Want to influence a casino bid? Polish your corporate image? Not be labeled a racist?
Then you need to pay Al Sharpton.
For more than a decade, corporations have shelled out thousands of dollars in donations and consulting fees to Sharpton’s National Action Network. What they get in return is the reverend’s supposed sway in the black community or, more often, his silence…
“Al Sharpton has enriched himself and NAN for years by threatening companies with bad publicity if they didn’t come to terms with him. Put simply, Sharpton specializes in shakedowns,” said Ken Boehm, chairman of the National Legal & Policy Center, a Virginia-based watchdog group that has produced a book on Sharpton.
This is a report well worth reading because some of it beggars the imagination. A Connecticut hedge firm group, Plainfield Asset Management, is on record as having ponied up $600,000 in two separate payments (funneled through another non-profit group) to Sharpton’s group while trying to curry favor with him during tricky government negotiations, or at least to avoid attracting fire from him. His group apparently had also been pestering General Motors for donations for many years without success. Then Al decided to protest GM in front of a dealership they were closing and suddenly the payments began. He pulled a similar move with American Honda in 2003, and also landed a $25K per year “consulting” gig with Pepsi after he threatened them with a boycott which mysteriously never happened after the checks started coming in.
One of the strangest tales in the article, however, deals with Sony Entertainment and the same woman made famous in recent stories about their leaked emails, Amy Pascal. While no money seems to have changed hands (yet), there was certainly a meeting of the minds.
Sony Pictures co-chair Amy Pascal met with the activist preacher after leaked e-mails showed her making racially charged comments about President Obama. Pascal was under siege after a suspected North Korean cyber attack pressured the studio to cancel its release of “The Interview,” which depicts the assassination of dictator Kim Jong-un.
Pascal and her team were said to be “shaking in their boots” and “afraid of the Rev,” The Post reported.
No payments to NAN have been announced, but Sharpton and Pascal agreed to form a “working group” to focus on racial bias in Hollywood.
I’m not saying that any of this will come as some sort of stunning surprise to our readers, but the boldness and audacity of it is almost breathtaking. And it’s all being done pretty much right out in the open. As a devout capitalist, I sort of have to tip my hat to Sharpton here. Good work if you can get it.