Posts Tagged ‘economy’

While the Feiler Faster Thesis Won’t Save Obama’s Bacon

Sunday, June 3rd, 2012

Micky Kaus, the Thinking Conservative’s Liberal, has been suggesting that the traditional thinking that the economy must be good at least six months before an election for the President to have a chance is wrong. His contention is that the Feiler Faster Thesis, the idea that the Internet has made it possible for much rapider media cycles to change people’s minds about things more quickly, will save Obama’s bacon even if we only see notable economy recovery, say, three or four months out.

I think the Feiler Faster Thesis is correct in general, but is mistaken in this particular instance. (And let’s temporarily ignore that I don’t think any economic recovery is in the offing at all this year.)

The problem is that this recession has been too long and deep for the Feiler Faster Thesis to save Obama even if the economy does pick up a few months before the election. People’s feelings about the economy are deeply tied to their personal experience. The people they know who are unemployed, the prices they pay at the grocery store, the foreclosures and lingering FOR SALE signs on their own street, the business and plants closings in their own city all trump the news cycle. While the Feiler Faster Thesis may explain rapid opinion changes about Iraq or Lady Gaga, it can’t override people’s own insecurity. Nobody cares about brightening economic indicators when they can’t pay their own bills

Which is not to say some people won’t pick up on economic news more rapidly. I’m sure that stock traders and hedge fund managers are working on faster cycles than ever before. But voters, especially independent and undecided voters, are still far more attuned to their own economic anxiety than to media narratives about a “recovery summer” they can’t see with their own eyes. Consumer confidence is considered a lagging economic indicator, which makes it precisely the sort of thing immune to the Feiler Faster Thesis.

The only people who think the Feiler Faster Theory might save Obama’s bacon are liberals who want it to.

Ten Days to a EuroZone Collapse?

Monday, November 28th, 2011

So says a piece in the Financial Times, here excerpted from behind the paywall.

Things are moving very fast indeed on the Euro front:

  • U.S. banks stop lending to European governments. While this is good news, the possibility that the Fed may rescue Europe is very, very bad news. Our own life raft is barely treading water, and now liberals want us to invite a dying elephant to climb aboard.
  • And not the Fed, then the IMF, which America also funds to a large extent.
  • This article from Der Spiegel is a good roundup on consensus wisdom, which boils down to the rest of Europe wondering why Angela Merkel won’t just give in and pay their bills.
  • There’s word she might even do it, but only if she can get France, Finland, the Netherlands, Luxembourg and Austria to join Germany in issuing “elite” Eurobonds. I mean, what’s another trillion in taxpayer equity flushed down the toilet in comparison to the beautiful dream of European integration?
  • Even Poland wants Germany to take a more active role, something that has not traditionally brought Poland tidings of comfort and joy.
  • Daniel Hannan at NRO provides a nice summary of the state of play:

    From the beginning, the Brussels elites made it clear that, to adapt Abraham Lincoln, their paramount object was to save the Union. Never mind if that meant imposing epochal poverty and emigration on the southern members, and unprecedented tax rises on the northern. Never mind if it meant toppling the elected prime ministers of Italy and Greece and replacing them with Eurocrats (respectively a former European Commissioner and a former vice president of the European Central Bank — two perfect specimens of the people who caused the crisis in the first place). They were prepared to pay any price to keep the euro together — or, more precisely, to expect their peoples to pay, since EU employees are generally exempt from national taxation.

  • How expensive will a Euro bank bailout be? Keep in mind that at one point during the 2008 meltdown, Morgan Stanley owed Uncle Sam $107 billion. With a B. For one bank.
  • In the mid-1990s, Bulgaria got a good look at a currency meltdown first-hand. They only recovered by adopting a currency board for the Lev (which is exactly what Steve H. Hanke and Kurt Schuler had suggested in 1991.)
  • The British Foreign office is already planning for a Euro collapse.
  • A general strike shuts down Portugal.
  • Finally, one Irish commentator puts things in purely mercenary terms:

    The only beneficiaries of the State’s assumption of [Anglo Irish Bank]’s liabilities are taxpayers in the countries whose banks were the reckless lenders to Anglo. Anglo, for all the guff at the time of the bank guarantee, had no systemic importance to the Irish economy. Irish taxpayers had no moral or other liability for its debts.

    The sole reason for saving it was the ECB’s insistence that no euro zone bank should fail. Had Anglo failed, the costs would have been borne primarily by European banks and consequently by European taxpayers.

    So the undertaking by the Irish State to stump up €47 billion to pay those private debts is an act of extreme (if extremely demented) euro-altruism. We are Europe’s ragged-trousered philanthropists, bailing out the euro with money we don’t have and that our European partners are kindly lending us at penal interest rates.

    And this single act of insane generosity wipes out every red cent we’ve got from Europe since 1973.

    [snip]

    And for what? For less than nothing. For a moment of panic, a daft notion, a stupid indulgence in bluster and bravado. Some bleary-eyed fools decided, in the middle of the night, that they could bluff the markets by throwing all the chips we might ever have on to the table. It didn’t take long for the markets to realise that their hand contained nothing better than a pair of deuces.

    But the gamble failed for Europe too. There might be some kind of (very expensive) pride in being able to say that little Ireland took the hit to save the euro zone, like the starry-eyed gal who takes a bullet for the outlaw in a corny western. But we saved nothing. All we managed to do was to buy the euro zone leaders more time in which to delude themselves that there was no real crisis.

  • Some Occupiers Are More Equal Than Others

    Sunday, November 20th, 2011

    I haven’t been covering Occupy [Place Name Here] because other people have been doing such a bang-up job of it, and because, objectively, it simply isn’t important. But the latest development is too tasty not to mention.

    A few weeks ago, when it turns out there was $500,000 just sitting in a bank to support OWS, the “leaderless movement” suddenly found out that they had leaders, who appeared without all that pesky “democracy” and “consensus” they kept talking about:

    On Sunday, October 23, a meeting was held at 60 Wall Street. Six leaders discussed what to do with the half-million dollars that had been donated to their organization, since, in their estimation, the organization was incapable of making sound financial decisions. The proposed solution was not to spend the money educating their co-workers or stimulating more active participation by improving the organization’s structures and tactics. Instead, those present discussed how they could commandeer the $500,000 for their new, more exclusive organization. No, this was not the meeting of any traditional influence on Wall Street. These were six of the leaders of Occupy Wall Street (OWS).

    Occupy Wall Street’s Structure Working Group (WG) has created a new organization called the Spokes Council. “Teach-ins” were held to workshop and promote the Spokes Council…

    According to Marisa Holmes, one of the most outspoken and influential leaders of OWS, the NYC-GA started receiving donations from around the world when OWS began on September 17. Because the NYC-GA was not an official organization, and therefore could not legally receive thousands of dollars in donations, the nonprofit Alliance for Global Justice helped OWS create Friends of Liberty Plaza, which receives tax-free donations for OWS. Since then, Friends of Liberty Plaza has received over $500,000. Until October 28, anybody who wanted to receive more than $100 from Friends of Liberty Plaza had to go through the often arduous modified consensus process (90% majority) of the NYC-GA—which, despite its well-documented inefficiencies, granted $25,740 to the Media WG for live-stream equipment on October 12, and $1,400 to the Food and Medical WGs for herbal tonics on October 18.

    At the teach-in, Ms. Holmes maintained that while the NYC-GA is the “de facto” mechanism for distributing funds, it has no right to do so, even though she acknowledged that most donors were likely under the impression that the NYC-GA was the only organization with access to these funds. Two other leaders of the teach-in, Daniel and Adash, concurred with Holmes.

    Ms. Holmes also stated at the teach-in that five people in the Finance WG have access to the $500,000 raised by Friends of Liberty Plaza. When Suresh Fernando, the man taking notes, asked who these people are, the leaders of the Structure WG nervously laughed and said that it was hard to keep track of the “constantly fluctuating” heads of the Finance WG. Mr. Fernando made at least four increasingly explicit requests for the names. Each request was turned down by the giggling, equivocating leaders.

    The leaders of the Structure WG eventually regained control of the teach-in. They said that they too were unhappy with the Finance WG’s monopoly over OWS’s funds, which is why they wanted to create the Spokes Council. What upset them more, however, was the inefficient and fickle General Assembly. A major point of the discussion was whether the Spokes Council and the NYC-GA should have access to the funds, or just the Spokes Council….

    When my turn came to speak, I brought up the plans of “the leaders of the allegedly leaderless movement” to commandeer the half-million dollars sent to the General Assembly for their new, exclusive, undemocratic, representational organization. Before I could finish, the facilitators and other members of the OWS inner circle started shouting over me. Amidst the confusion, the human mic stopped projecting what I, or anybody was saying. Because silence was what they were after, the leaders won.

    Eventually one of the facilitators regained control of the crowd and explained that I was speaking “opinions, not facts,” which is why I would not be allowed to continue. He also asserted untruthfully that I had gone over my allotted minute. Notably, the facilitators and members of the OWS inner circle regularly ignore time restrictions.

    This reaction shouldn’t surprise anyone. It is reasonable to expect any undemocratic organization to be co-opted eventually by a vocal minority or charismatic individual. On Friday, October 29, the proposal to create the Spokes Council was put to the NYC-GA for a fifth time, and finally received a 90% majority. The facilitators assisted the process by denying two vocal critics of the Spokes Council their allotted time to speak against it.

    So who is party of the shadowy “Finance Working Group”? Well, one of them is “Pete Dutro, 34, a tattoo artist and former software project manager who dropped out of an NYU finance degree program to join the occupation.”

    It must be a real hardship for Dutro to give up his education to handle all that money while sleeping in a park. Or it would be, if he weren’t using that money to stay in a $700 a night hotel.

    Fritz Tucker, the Occupy participant quoted so extensively above, said of the funding takeover that “I felt like I was watching a local production of Animal Farm.” Having already deployed that metaphor, one wonder what he would have left to say about Mr. Dutro’s swanky hotel. If you put that in a novel, your editor would make you take it out because the symbolism was too heavy-handed.

    From the very first Occupy Wall Street has struck me as a movement ginned-up by Obama’s left-wing allies, using a mixture of the usual circus who attend any left-wing rally plus some paid stooges and naive joiners, designed to distract attention from Obama scandals like Fast and Furious and Solyandra, and created out of a sense of “Tea Party Envy” on the left. But while Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street tentatively agree on one big economic problem (namely, crony capitalism), their approaches to solving it are radically different. The Tea Party wants to get rid of the cronyism, but the Occupy Wall Street crowd wants to keep the cronyism, but get rid of the capitalism.

    In some ways you have to admire the efficiency of the operation. After all it took more than 200 years of the Republic before people like Nancy Pelosi and John Kerry were able to pervert democratic institutions the system enough to reap the full benefits of crony capitalism, but Pete Dutro has managed to go from misplaced idealism to outright looting in under two months!

    Despite the risible “99%” posturing, Occupy Wall Street is being run by, and for, the Democratic Party and their left-wing fellow travelers: ACORN, unions, the MSM. (Has any Occupy [Place Name Here] protester ever called for smaller government and less spending?) Which is why its ironic that the only people it’s actually inconveniencing are those who live and work in the hearts of very large metropolitan areas, i.e. largely the same Obama-voting urban liberal elite who already seemed to believe in the risible class war tripe peddled by the Occupy Wall Street crowd. All it’s doing now is eating up municipal budgets and alienating independent potential Obama voters.

    A few more random Occupy Wall Street tidbits:

  • Here’s a handy chart for which crimes have been committed at which occupy sites.
  • Dark Knight creator Frank Miller weighs in in a nice juicy that has the panties of various leftist comics fans in a knot. “’Occupy’ is nothing but a pack of louts, thieves, and rapists, an unruly mob, fed by Woodstock-era nostalgia and putrid false righteousness. These clowns can do nothing but harm America.” However, I wonder if it’s he jabs at Occupy that has really steamed them as much as his jab at that most sacred of victim groups, radical Islam. Given Wiscon’s disinviting of Elizabeth Moon over the very mildest of criticisms of Islam, I’m guessing the latter.
  • Being creatures of the left, the Occupy [Place Name Here] crowd have never complained about Obama’s extensive ties with Goldman Sachs.
  • Here’s a hedge fund manager offering up talking points for Occupy Wall Street. However, since he’s discussing the various government distortions of the market that lead to the current situation (he even mentions Solyndra!), I feel confident in predicting that none of the current Occupy crowd will take him up on it.
  • Mark Steyn’s essay on Occupy.
  • It’s Good to Be the King

    Monday, October 18th, 2010

    The king of creating jobs, that is. “More than half of the net new jobs in the U.S. during the past 12 months were created in the Lone Star State.”

    Funny what happens when you have:

    • No state income tax
    • Right to work laws
    • No out-of-control public employee unions
    • Conservative Republicans in charges of the Governor’s mansion, the House, and the Senate
    • Which have actually constrained the growth of government during boom times
    • A requirement by law to balance the budget
    • Regulations that encourage private enterprise rather than punish it
    • A healthy disdain for Political Correctness
    • A thriving high tech sector
    • Warm weather
    • Natural ports

    Some might think the last three are the most important factors, but California has all those as well, and their economy is biting the moose hard.

    For a more detailed breakdown of of why Texas is kicking California’s ass (and not just at football), read this Arduin, Laffer & Moore report put out by the Texas Public Policy Foundation. Notice, for example, that Texas has lower taxes in every single category except sale tax (where the two are close to even)…and California is still broke! You can’t tax your way to prosperity.

    Liberal policies don’t fail because of bad luck, or because of some sinister conservative conspiracy to make them fail. Liberal policies fail because the liberal ideas behind them are wrong.

    Reality, it seems, has a free market bias.

    Is everything we think we know about China’s economy wrong?

    Tuesday, November 10th, 2009

    Could be.

    (By way of Instapundit.)