We keep hearing from our politicians and pundits, and we start believing it ourselves, that we are facing unprecedented problems in this country and that things are worse now than they have ever been. In short these are the worse of times for the United States.
Nonsense.
What about 1929- 1939-- the Great Depression, massive unemployment , dust bowls, runs on the banks, Hoovervilles, breadlines, labor union clashes,etc.
What about 1940-43 -- Nazi Germany marching through Europe and advancing on Leningrad, Britain under siege, Pearl Harbor and Japan sweeping through the Pacific.
What about the 1950's with the Korean War and the expanding Communist Soviet Union and it's nuclear threat ( remember those drills hiding under school desk), culminating with the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1961. McCarthyism and its fall out.
Racism and bigotry were rampant. Eventually strife arose from the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s and beyond , including the riots after MLK's assassination.
What about the Viet Nam War, with so many killed and wounded, and massive demonstrations, protests and civil disobedience in the 1960's and early 70's.
Remember all the years when we constantly lamented Urban Decay and the loss of our Farm Economy. Don't forget the era of Stagflaion and gas lines from the Arab Oil Embargo and the Savings and Loan Crisis. Our cities were crumbling and farmers couldn't make a decent living. The "inner cities " were dying.
Women and minorities did not have the rights and opportunities they have today.
We had some very bad recessions in the mid 1970s and early 1980s and 1990s. Don't forget the bursting of the DotCom bubble in 2001, with the economic down turn following that. Of course let's not forget 9/11.
Remember that in the 50s the top tax rate exceeded 70% and has been essentially falling since to where we are at today.
If we honestly examine it, the "good old days" weren't all that great.
Today, things comparatively aren't all that bad, and maybe that is why we have to amplify the problems we do have for some reason.
Of course the unemployment rate is a terrible problem, and debt and deficit are very serious problems that have to be dealt with. Housing prices are dreadful after the sub prime lending crisis set off the housing collapse which lead to the financial melt down and resulting Great Recession.
However inflation and interest rates are low. We are in the painful but ultimately beneficial process of de-leveraging our debt levels. Those who have jobs are doing reasonably well and are now feeling less worried. While home values have plunged most people are secure in their housing situation. The market has come back nicely from it's lows and the main market problems today appear to be in Europe and with our politicians. Our corporations are operating at very profitable levels and basically are awaiting increased demand to justify new hiring. Reportedly they are sitting on a mountain of cash but need to have confidence in the economy to invest it. Where will that come from?
Notwithstanding Standard and Poor's, the world believes that US Treasuries are still the safest investment in the world.
Our farm economy is so strong that it should be embarrassing to them to still be getting large government farm subsidies. For example, Iowa is in great shape, so what are they so angry about?
The wars we are involved in are being fought by volunteers who, for a variety of reasons, have chosen to be in the military. Therefore the rest of us really haven't had to sacrifice to fight these far off wars. The risk of a terrorist attack is real but sadly it is the nature of world we live in.
The one thing that really is broken is our political process. Our politicians, abetted by the pundits, have created a toxic atmosphere over things that in reality can be relatively easily dealt with by people of good will and reason. For example, Simpson Bowles would do the job, and relatively painlessly. Why hasn't either party embraced it? The so called Gang of Six are on the right track but partisan on both sides of the aisle block compromise at every turn.
Since our country's strengths are so extensive and our assets are so strong , we can do the things that need to be done, if the political will is there. We can afford to raise revenue. There certainly are areas where spending can and should be cut significantly. Meaningful adjustments to entitlements can be made in a relatively minor and thoughtful way which would have a major impact on bringing down the debt and the deficit.
Once a program which includes these things is developed and implemented, confidence in our political process will be restored and the economy will start to grow again and finish the job of solving our debt and deficit problems, as occurred in the 1990s when economic prosperity generated increased tax revenues from increased incomes and profits. We are lucky our problem are so solvable -- think Greece.
However, there are too many politician and pundits who don't want to solve our problems; no, they just want to win elections to gain or retain power. When will we all wake up to the fact that they care more about winning elections , with all the spoils that provides, than what is in the best interest of the country.
Maybe that has always been true, and is just a part of human nature, but it's so much more apparent these days.
Shared sacrifice through political consensus is the answer. Compared to what we have had to do in the past , it shouldn't be all that hard.
Eric
Thursday, August 18, 2011
Friday, August 5, 2011
Gold
Gold-- I don't get it.
Yes, I know people have made a lot of money investing in gold (just like they did during the dotcom bubble), but I still don't have a clue why. It's pretty, sort of rare and has minimal industrial value, but I still don't get why it continues to increase in value.
What am I missing? It doesn't grow or produce a thing. You can't eat it. It pays no interest or dividend. It has limited industrial or practical value. Sure it may be pretty and make nice jewelry, but that's about it.
It's heavy and hard to transport, so if there really was an apocalyptic event what good would it be? Again you couldn't eat it or kill something with it. Who'd accept it in trade for what?
I'm not kidding, I don't get it. Somebody please enlighten me. I feel like the kid from the Emperor's new clothes fairytale. Gold isn't really worth anywhere near today's market price.
Eric
Yes, I know people have made a lot of money investing in gold (just like they did during the dotcom bubble), but I still don't have a clue why. It's pretty, sort of rare and has minimal industrial value, but I still don't get why it continues to increase in value.
What am I missing? It doesn't grow or produce a thing. You can't eat it. It pays no interest or dividend. It has limited industrial or practical value. Sure it may be pretty and make nice jewelry, but that's about it.
It's heavy and hard to transport, so if there really was an apocalyptic event what good would it be? Again you couldn't eat it or kill something with it. Who'd accept it in trade for what?
I'm not kidding, I don't get it. Somebody please enlighten me. I feel like the kid from the Emperor's new clothes fairytale. Gold isn't really worth anywhere near today's market price.
Eric
Theater of the Absurd
Now that the debt ceiling has been raised, all this talk about still lowering the AAA rating of US Treasuries is beyond silly, and boarders on absurd.
Let's start with the rating agencies, you know those guys that rated those subprime mortgage securities AAA. Lots of credibility there! These same guys are now going to say US Treasuries are not the safest investment?
How ridiculous they would look when, after a downgrade, the interest rate on USTs remain below other AAA rated countries debt. Looking at how in demand USTs are world wide, and how low the rate of interest buyers are willing to accept, maybe investors know something the rating agencies do not. Namely (politicians aside) the US is still the strongest, safest, most stable and transparent major country in the world and as such remains the safest haven for investors.
I don't think a downgrade will happen, which is why I call this whole controversy a bit of Theater of the Absurd. The rating agencies may be trying to make a point with all the cautions, outlooks and watches, but they'd look ridicules if they actually did it and lowered USTs below AAA.
Eric
Let's start with the rating agencies, you know those guys that rated those subprime mortgage securities AAA. Lots of credibility there! These same guys are now going to say US Treasuries are not the safest investment?
How ridiculous they would look when, after a downgrade, the interest rate on USTs remain below other AAA rated countries debt. Looking at how in demand USTs are world wide, and how low the rate of interest buyers are willing to accept, maybe investors know something the rating agencies do not. Namely (politicians aside) the US is still the strongest, safest, most stable and transparent major country in the world and as such remains the safest haven for investors.
I don't think a downgrade will happen, which is why I call this whole controversy a bit of Theater of the Absurd. The rating agencies may be trying to make a point with all the cautions, outlooks and watches, but they'd look ridicules if they actually did it and lowered USTs below AAA.
Eric
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
No Country for Kurds
Why does almost no one talk about a country for the Kurds, but constantly focus on a country for the Palestinians?
The Kurds has been a separate people for centuries. They live in a relatively compact contiguous area which today constitutes parts of Turkey, Iraq, Syria and Iran. They are treated badly everywhere. In Turkey they are not even allowed to speak their own language. At least Palestinians are Arabs and Arabs have many countries. Do the Arabs really need another country, while the Kurds have none and the Jews just one.
Actually, I just had a thought-- what would have happened in 1948 if there were no Jews in the area? After the British left,would there have been the creation of a Palestinian State or, as I believe more likely, just Greater Syria/Jordan/Egypt? Maybe Greater Lebanon too.
Yes, I know the reality, at this point in time, is that we need the creation of a Palestinian state, but something tells me that, ironically, without the Jews living in the region with an historical claim to the land, there would be no thought of a Palestinian homeland.
As to the Kurds, some have suggested that if they were fighting Jews or if there were wealthier Kurds living in the US , we would hear more about a country for them.
All things considered the Kurds have a stronger claim to a country of their own than most countries in that region.
Eric
P.S. Don't even get me started on Tibet.
The Kurds has been a separate people for centuries. They live in a relatively compact contiguous area which today constitutes parts of Turkey, Iraq, Syria and Iran. They are treated badly everywhere. In Turkey they are not even allowed to speak their own language. At least Palestinians are Arabs and Arabs have many countries. Do the Arabs really need another country, while the Kurds have none and the Jews just one.
Actually, I just had a thought-- what would have happened in 1948 if there were no Jews in the area? After the British left,would there have been the creation of a Palestinian State or, as I believe more likely, just Greater Syria/Jordan/Egypt? Maybe Greater Lebanon too.
Yes, I know the reality, at this point in time, is that we need the creation of a Palestinian state, but something tells me that, ironically, without the Jews living in the region with an historical claim to the land, there would be no thought of a Palestinian homeland.
As to the Kurds, some have suggested that if they were fighting Jews or if there were wealthier Kurds living in the US , we would hear more about a country for them.
All things considered the Kurds have a stronger claim to a country of their own than most countries in that region.
Eric
P.S. Don't even get me started on Tibet.
Get Real
Congress stop being crazy. Raise debt the ceiling now before the credit markets panic, and adopt Simpson Bowles as a long term economic plan.
I believe that would ignite our economy, create jobs and raise incomes. Yes, raise taxes/revenues, but put our fiscal house in order as well.
Unfortunately that is not the real aim of either party.
The Republicans don't want to solve the deficit problem, they want to eliminate government. They want to drastically cut down on the role of government, and are using this crisis as a means to accomplish that goal.
While the Democrats aren't nearly as bad, they are playing into the Republicans hands by refusing to make even sensible moderate changes to entitlements programs like refusing to raise the retirement age for Social Security by just 1 year and that beginning 30 years from now.
A strong, fiscally sound US would leave the hopeless EU in the dust and fend off rising China. All we need is the common sense approach embodied in the Simpson Bowles proposal.
Eric
I believe that would ignite our economy, create jobs and raise incomes. Yes, raise taxes/revenues, but put our fiscal house in order as well.
Unfortunately that is not the real aim of either party.
The Republicans don't want to solve the deficit problem, they want to eliminate government. They want to drastically cut down on the role of government, and are using this crisis as a means to accomplish that goal.
While the Democrats aren't nearly as bad, they are playing into the Republicans hands by refusing to make even sensible moderate changes to entitlements programs like refusing to raise the retirement age for Social Security by just 1 year and that beginning 30 years from now.
A strong, fiscally sound US would leave the hopeless EU in the dust and fend off rising China. All we need is the common sense approach embodied in the Simpson Bowles proposal.
Eric
Surrender
Al Qaeda should "surrender" to US and announce that they no longer will attack us. Why do they keep fighting us. They are getting their "brains beat out" and would be more effective dealing with their other enemies if we weren't there killing their leaders.
Maybe they don't have to "surrender", but somehow make it clear to us that they are no longer coming after us. With all of our high tech drones, missiles and special forces , do they really want us as an active enemy? Given our new spirit of isolationism , I'm pretty sure we won't jump to the defense of our allies if Al Qaeda weren't threatening us.
We can then just declare that the War on Terror, at least as far as the USA is concerned, is over and we won.
Even the most fanatical can't really believe they can takeover the USA; so just give up and focus on someone they can beat without us involved like the Europeans and the rest of the Muslim world.
I thought you all would enjoy a good laugh.
Eric
Maybe they don't have to "surrender", but somehow make it clear to us that they are no longer coming after us. With all of our high tech drones, missiles and special forces , do they really want us as an active enemy? Given our new spirit of isolationism , I'm pretty sure we won't jump to the defense of our allies if Al Qaeda weren't threatening us.
We can then just declare that the War on Terror, at least as far as the USA is concerned, is over and we won.
Even the most fanatical can't really believe they can takeover the USA; so just give up and focus on someone they can beat without us involved like the Europeans and the rest of the Muslim world.
I thought you all would enjoy a good laugh.
Eric
Not your usual foreclosure story
Sunday June 19th front page NYT foreclosure article. http://s.nyt.com/u/4cHv
At last the story is out, sort of. Millions living rent free and more. The untold story of the foreclosure debacle. Now don't get me wrong, a whole lot of people have obviously lost their homes and are suffering , but according to that article, many are just staying put and living rent free, while the lenders are screwing up trying to foreclose, or as the article says, sometimes no longer even trying to foreclose. According to a defense lawyer many of his clients are renting out their properties, not paying their mortgages and pocketing the difference.
I'm not trying to disparage the vast majority who got in over their heads and may have been the victim of predatory lending practices , but my point is that the economic impact on many people in foreclosure may not be as bad as the headlines would lead us to believe. Not likely to hear about this Times article on the morning talk shows. It doesn't fit the conventional narrative, and frankly I was quite surprised (and pleased) it was done by the New York Times.
Also it all of this "sky in falling" foreclosure mania that is prolonging this recession and this article, if understood by the public, might somewhat lessen that negative perspective.
Eric
At last the story is out, sort of. Millions living rent free and more. The untold story of the foreclosure debacle. Now don't get me wrong, a whole lot of people have obviously lost their homes and are suffering , but according to that article, many are just staying put and living rent free, while the lenders are screwing up trying to foreclose, or as the article says, sometimes no longer even trying to foreclose. According to a defense lawyer many of his clients are renting out their properties, not paying their mortgages and pocketing the difference.
I'm not trying to disparage the vast majority who got in over their heads and may have been the victim of predatory lending practices , but my point is that the economic impact on many people in foreclosure may not be as bad as the headlines would lead us to believe. Not likely to hear about this Times article on the morning talk shows. It doesn't fit the conventional narrative, and frankly I was quite surprised (and pleased) it was done by the New York Times.
Also it all of this "sky in falling" foreclosure mania that is prolonging this recession and this article, if understood by the public, might somewhat lessen that negative perspective.
Eric
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)