Your source for conservative news, opinion, and analysis written by several conservative commentators. This blog will provide daily analysis for politics of the day. We're not the top conservative blog, but we're working on it!
Peter Morici writes a contributed column at The Street which explains that Greece must abandon the euro and go to another currency like the drachma it used to have in order to allow it to devalue its currency against the euro and other currencies. It is worth noting one interesting benefit to strong exporters in Europe such as Germany is that a common currency allows them to sell to weaker countries like Greece through subsidized monetary policy. Basically, because of the euro, the Greeks can buy a BMW more inexpensively.
In other words, Greece consumers benefit from the euro the same way the German manufacturers do. The challenge of course is that Greece does not have as productive an economy, they have more tax evasion than they should and since their currency isn't dropping in value commensurate with their financial situation, they aren't able to boost tourism or the value of their exports.
The sad reality for Greece and the US is in the following paragraph:
The only real solutions are for Greece to restructure its debt -- both sovereign and private creditors should take haircuts; abandon the euro and reinstate the drachma; and rethink its welfare state.
Greece is facing another - and this time major downgrade to its debt by Fitch and the continent's liberal policies may indeed bankrupt the EU. In the US - the Obama administration in partnership with Pelosi, Reid and liberal Democrats are not only modeling US policy on Europe they are trying to get to insolvency first. Paul Krugman of the New York Times is the biggest proponent in the media of spending well beyond our means and many use his writings as cover to behave financially in a way they wouldn't and can't in their personal or corporate lives.
I hope those who believe in fiscal responsibility and hope to leave a better country to their children will join me in utilizing the new and infinitely accurate term "Krugman Death Spiral" when referring to any country which spends beyond its means and subsequently spirals downward.
I am not a financial expert nor am I an economist – but considering they all have missed virtually every significant financial event from the dotcom bubble to the telecom bubble and the housing bubble let’s just say not being an economist or financial expert probably is a distinct advantage.
Having said this, I would like to discuss a few issues which need to be out in the open and discussed before the new Congress begins.
Bank runs are bad
Banks do not keep all of their assets in cash meaning if the majority of a bank’s customers decide to withdraw all of their money at the same time, the bank collapses. Think about it – they loan much of the money they have to others and don’t have access to it all. When one bank collapses there is a chance other investors will get spooked and create a cascade of bank failures. When not stopped, you have the potential for another Great Depression.
Bank runs are currently stoppable because governments can stop them
To date, bank runs have been stopped because governments around the world have been able to stop them by assuming the bad loans the banks have made.
Soon, global governments may not be able to stop the bank runs
With all the debt global governments have amassed, there is a possibility at some point that investors will start a global bank run meaning county after country will see their banks collapse because the confidence in the ability of a country to pay back its debt has plummeted.
Ireland may kick off a worldwide panic
If you follow financial news you may know much of Europe is in trouble because in general they work less hours than they should and produce far less than they need to in order to sustain the lifestyle they live.
If you graduated college and live in the DC area you are less than half as likely to think Sarah Palin is qualified to be President. So says a Politco poll which is full of useful information which shows fairly consistently that Washington elites are somewhat if not totally disconnected from the rest of the population.
Consider that this month, 38% of the DC elites think the economy is headed in the right direction but only 26% of the general population believes this is the case.
The poll itself shows why the disconnect is taking place. We know that the Obama administration is responsible for the largest federal payroll in history so we would assume that government workers and those who feed off them are very happy. Moreover, the average government worker makes twice what the typical non-government worker makes.
The recent press conference where President Obama tried to sell tax cuts for those making over $250k while extending unemployment benefits for 13 months struck me as being odd but until I read Peggy Noonan's article titled From Audacity to Animosity, I couldn't understand what was so perplexing.
This portion of the article is most important:
President Obama was supposed to be announcing an important compromise, as he put it, on tax policy. Normally a president, having agreed with the opposition on something big, would go through certain expected motions. He would laud the specific virtues of the plan, show graciousness toward the negotiators on the other side—graciousness implies that you won—and refer respectfully to potential critics as people who'll surely come around once they are fully exposed to the deep merits of the plan.
Instead Mr. Obama said, essentially, that he hates the deal he just agreed to, hates the people he made the deal with, and hates even more the people who'll criticize it.
Without the US government pushing subprime loans for home purchasing which by definition are a risky product, there could be no start to the subprime housing bubble which eventually burst. Countless government agencies have been involved in the mortgage business for decades such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and laws such as the Community Reinvestment Act over time held banks accountable by forcing them to lower their lending standards so as not to charged with unfair lending practices.
In other words, if the government over decades and through both Republican and Democratic administrations did not get deeply involved with ensuring people with poor credit were getting loans, we would not have seen a sub-prime housing bubble or a bursting thereof.
This doesn't mean home prices wouldn't have corrected - we have seen many corrections over the years but this one would have been much milder if the government wasn't standing over the banks ready to call them racists and charging them with crimes for not lending to minorities who tend to have lower credit scores.
John Carney has an incredibly well-researched article on the topic and it should be read by anyone who does not want to see a repeat of the housing collapse.
Rather than looking at the real roots of the problem, the government has done an amazing job blaming Wall Street and just about anyone else they can find for the problem. Sure Wall Street played a role but the major distortion in the market came from the government and it amplified the pain of the crash because it amplified the rise in prices.
The facts are crucial to understand as the AP just reported that HUD is investigating mortgage lenders who require better credit scores than the government requires to get a mortgage. The issue they have is that minorities have lower credit scores and are subsequently not able to purchase as many homes.
There is no charge of discrimination based on race mind you but just on credit score.
The policies have "the effect of discriminating against African–Americans, Latinos, and residents of African–American and Latino neighborhoods across the nation," the National Community Reinvestment Coalition wrote in the complaints that it announced Wednesday.
If each of us individually cannot borrow our way to prosperity, is it logical to believe that collectively we can do the same? Absolutely not. But that doesn't stop politicians from borrowing massive amounts of money from potentially hostile regimes to finance a virtual Ponzi scheme of promised entitlements.
Ronald Reagan said the following during his inauguration - "You and I as individuals, by borrowing, can live beyond our means but for only a limited period of time. Why then should we think that collectively, as a nation, we're not bound by that same limitation?"
We Continue to Believe the Democratic Politician Seems Most Reasonable When Screaming
Rather than seeing the Tea Party as what it is - a massive grass-roots movement initiated by Americans who are fed up with large government and re-distributive progressive ideals which end up hurting the very people they are supposedly helping, Dean once again plays the race card saying the Tea Party is uncomfortable with the current demographic shift in the US.
Dean does not let facts get in his way of course - totally ignoring that the Tea Party just elected more minorities than Democrats - instead, he goes on to show that the only thing less coherent than his screaming is his rambling.
While racism was often used to discredit the Tea Party in its early days, sane people have come to the realization that there are likely the same number of racists in the Tea Party as any other group of people such as Democrats or Republicans.
But rather than debate the merits of his arguments - for example, how can he explain taking more money from the private sector which is currently used to create jobs will create more jobs?
Morover, if most people start or grow new companies because of the potential to become wealthy, how can lowering the amount of wealth a person can achieve, increase the rate of new business creation and subsequently job creation?
Other arguments you will see Dean avoid are how can placing any able-bodied person on government assistance for many years or decades make them a productive member of society enabling the US to compete effectively with our new competitors in China and India.
Moreover, has anyone ever seen him address how borrowing money from countries with terrible human rights abuses - ones we don't consider allies, enables the US to negotiate for better rights in such countries?
No, for Howard Dean, the argument is that the Tea Party is racist and Republicans are bad because they believe that everyone should have the opportunity to succeed and by providing society with maximal opportunity, they have the maximal chance of becoming self-sufficient and potentially wealthy. Moreover, conservative principles achieve something no Democrat wants for the poor - the dignity of being able to provide for themselves - free of the need for government assistance.
America continues to be the land of opportunity and hordes of immigrants come to the US every year to escape large-government and/or religious/racial/class oppression, in order to start companies or work in other roles which help provide jobs for countless others.
Yet Democrats conveniently ignore the fact that someone with English as a second-language but the desire to make it to the top can come to the US and become incredibly successful. And they discard the fact that this happens regardless of race, religion or sexual orientation - in the US - we truly (for the most part) judge you based upon your character, knowledge, skills and ability.
Other countries have rigid class structures which encumber the entrepreneurs - people will ask you your last name and about your father and mother and use this information to ascertain if they should loan you money or give you an opportunity.
And they wonder why companies are moving to Switzerland
The detachment of US politicians never ceases to amaze us - they blab on and on about made-up class divisions and talk endlessly about how wealthy need to pay their "fair share" - all the while never focusing on reality which is, anyone with the drive and ambition in the US can make it to the top and become wealthy.
The greatest irony of all of course is hearing about manufactured class divisions from President Obama - a minority who went from having a single parent and living on food stamps to Harvard and the Presidency - while becoming a millionaire!
And as if this were not not enough, each year, poor people from around the world escape their own countries to come to the US and many quickly become millionaires as well. And generally with immigrants, English is not their first language - putting them at a major disadvantage.
Instead of celebrating the hundreds of millions of people who have been pulled out of poverty worldwide because of the current US quasi-capitalist system and trying to help everyone make it to the top, leading Democrats like Pelosi, Reid and Barney Frank have continued their war on the productive job creators of this nation through policies, threats and speeches. Let us not forget Hillary Clinton who believes that no matter how much US tax payers shell out - it is not enough - and she says we need to emulate Brazil of all places. One wonders if the Democrats have a secret competition going on between them to see who can destroy the most jobs for their citizens.
Should anyone be surprised that after pumping trillions of dollars borrowed from other countries into our economy, it is not producing many if any jobs?
Last night we wrote about how the White House and Democrats in general are purposely pursuing policies which will kill jobs by raising taxes on small business owners. Congressman Paul Ryan explains on CNBC that not only are the Democrats raising taxes on job creators, they are being very nuanced with the facts - inaccurately explaining that the tax increases will not kill jobs.
You see Democrats will tell you that only 2% of filers are affected by the tax increases - but what they don't say is it is half the income of small business will be hit with this tax increase! You see, the way the tax rules are set up, if you sell something on eBay and report it, you are considered a small business. That is why this argument is so divisive and why many on the left are able to twist the facts to their advanatage - knowing full well, they will be killing US jobs by raising taxes on small business owners.
While we attributed what the Democrats are doing to purposely killing jobs to increase government dependency - since government dependents generally vote Democrat. Congressman Ryan takes a slightly different view when saying, "Class warfare is effective politics because it prays into the emotions of fear and envy, but its really bad economics."
During the healtchcare debate where the White House said they would be trying to work with Republicans, Congressman Ryan explained to President Obama that the American people don't want Obamacare in its present form and he went on to say that Obama was not listening to the people.