Difference in Standards

Remember a few months back when Christopher Lee - the Republican Congressman from New York - was discovered to have posted a shirtless picture of himself online? What happened? Oh yeah, he resigned the very night that it came to light. His fellow Republicans weren't going to accept this sort of behavior or the distraction that would be associated with it. The Republicans have since lost Representative Lee's seat to the Democrats in the recent special election.

Now, what about Congressman Weiner. The night the issue appeared, he lied. Then as the scandal festered, he lied some more. Then it was starting to boil so he called in all the networks and lied again. As the lies inevitably failed, Weiner came out and admitted it. See, he's taking responsibility for his bad behavior. Well, only because he couldn't avoid it any longer. So, did the Democrats follow the Republican standard and demand Weiner resign posthaste? No. They're going with an ethics investigation. Even if Weiner did resign, the Democrats are unlikely to lose the seat.

Which party is holding its members to a higher standard of behavior?

Romney: the New McCain

Mitt Romney entered the race this week and already I'm disappointed. First, he still backs Romneycare. If government mandates that you have car insurance if you want to drive, that's one thing. One can opt not to drive and bypass this cost. The cost is associated with a privilege (i.e. driving). But when government mandates that you have health insurance if you want to not be a criminal, that's something entirely different. Granted, Romney has a point when he argues there is a difference between a state-mandate and a federal government mandate. He is arguing for federalism. Let the states be laboratories and great ideas will spread while bad ones will wither away. A federal mandate doesn't allow for bad ideas to wither away. But here's the thing: how can the electorate believe you want to restrain government when you clearly didn't at the state level? Furthermore, how can you make Obamacare a campaign issue when you have the albatross of Romneycare to bear? He neutralizes a huge campaign issue with his stance. Strike one on Romney.

During a campaign stop in New Hampshire, Romney stated his belief that humans contribute to global warming. "It’s important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases that may be significant contributors." As I have said many times before, the earth was hotter 1000 years ago and there were no SUVs. At one point, the earth was so hot that Maine was in the tropics and northern Alaska was a rain forest. But this time around, it's our fault and we need to take measures that will have no demonstrable effect other than to impoverish our economy. Moreover, China will not participate in this folly, thus assuring America's relative decline. Strike two on Romney.

The campaign has hardly begun and he's already got two strikes against him. I would prefer him to Obama but he looks like this year's McCain.

Disincentive to Create US Jobs?

Boeing is opening a facility in South Carolina to build the 787. A US company creating high-paying jobs inside the United States. Should be great, right? Wrong. The National Labor Relations Board is not happy.

The labor board's complaint filed earlier this month alleges Boeing decided to build a $750 million aircraft assembly plant in South Carolina because it was concerned about strikes by union workers in the state of Washington. Associated Press

Ah. South Carolina is a right to work state. The Washington unions will suffer if production moves. Can't have that. So, the NATIONAL Labor Relation Board has decided to come down on the side of Washington over South Carolina. Playing favorites? The question then becomes this: What incentives is the NLRB creating? Well, if NLRB gets its way, Boeing won't open a facility in SC. The WA unions will benefit, right? Not necessarily. The NLRB can only complain within the US. Boeing might instead escape union strikes by locating overseas, which will benefit neither SC nor WA.

Manufacturing has been fleeing the US because of things like this. Every job that has fled overseas is because it is cheaper to produce there. Even with the shipping costs, it is still cheaper. Unlike the service economy which must be close to its clients, manufacturing can escape overbearing government by leaving the jurisdiction. Businesses can, like people, vote with their feet.

End the Fed

Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve, had the first ever press conference in the nearly century history of the institution. He said not to worry about inflation and that unemployment should slowly decline over the next two years. I beg to differ. Sure, employment should improve but inflation is coming. Look at the price of gold: it was going for $880/oz. in Jan. 09 but is currently trading at $1540/oz. Silver has gone from $11/oz. to $49/oz. in that time. Gas and food are also climbing. Oh, the government will assure you that gas is going up because of speculators and greedy oil companies. Never mentioned will be that with each new dollar that is printed, the ones in your wallet become less valuable.

The primary purpose of the Fed was originally to keep the money stable, make it a reliable store of value. Inflation is anathema to that. However, governments love inflation. Inflation is a tax. Inflation allows government to continue spending or to pay off debts with devalued currency.

None of what I say would come as a revelation to Bernanke. So, he knows inflation is coming. He knows that to rein it in will require a rise in the interest rate which will choke off job-creating investment. None of this is new. He, better than most, knows where these policies have led in the past. What is he thinking? He didn't explain it in his unprecedented press conference.

Debt Ceiling

I am generally a big fan of Charles Krauthammer but his recent take on the looming debt limit crisis is troubling. Why is it an 'adult moment' to get yet another credit card to pile up more debt? Shouldn't the adult thing be to stop spending beyond our means? The Republicans are falling all over themselves with their plans to cut $100 billion of spending. Oooh! Will that reduce the deficit from $1.4 trillion to $1.3 trillion? Wow, that's some cutting. Tragic and painful as it may be, we need to cut a bit more deeply than that. Racing toward the cliff at 75 mph rather than 80 mph still leaves us hurling into the ravine.

There is talk of defaulting if we don't raise the debt ceiling. How does that work? I've already borrowed for my mortgage and I'm on time with my payments but if I fail to borrow more, I'll have my house in foreclosure? No, I don't think so. If the debt ceiling isn't raised, the spending will have to slow down immediately to the rate of incoming revenue. Wow, what a concept! Spending within our means.

Sadly, this is just another political football. If the Republicans try to hold the line at $14.3 trillion, the Democrats will not join in. Economic disaster may follow and the Democrats will blame the Republicans and vice versa. So, what to do? Wait for 2012 and the chance that they win both the Senate and the Presidency? Risky. The car may have already gone off the cliff. I vote to slam on the brakes and shut the government down if need be. The spending must stop, the sooner the better. It will be unpopular no matter when it is done so best to do it right out the gate. The House controls the purse strings and it must choke off the funds. Get on TV every night and say "We don't have the money" over and over again. It has the benefit of being true.

Oklahoma City Redux

Yes, already I read stories that Congresswoman Giffords was shot because of the vitriolic rhetoric from, just for example, Sarah Palin and the Tea Party Movement. Those darned right wingers are pushing people to violence again. When Obama says you must 'punish your enemies' or wants to know 'whose ass to kick' or has his 'boot on the neck' or such, that isn't vitriolic rhetoric. However, when Sarah Palin 'targets' the 8th District in AZ with a graphic showing a cross hair, well, that's over the line. Of course someone is going to go on a shooting rampage.

Much like the guy who flew his plane into the IRS building last year, this guy is a crackpot. I watched a couple of his YouTube slide shows and they were pretty kooky. He really does talk about mind control through grammar and declares that sadly only 5% of Americans dream. Of interest, he had a list of his favorite books on his profile. Nothing by any contemporary right wingers but he did mention We The Living (Ayn Rand), The Communist Manifesto (Karl Marx), Mein Kampf (Adolf Hitler), The Republic (Plato), and Meno (Plato). Notably missing are any books by Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, Ronald Reagan, Bill Buckley, etc. A classmate of his reportedly says he was a left winger.

As a congresswoman has been shot, there is already a push to provide security for all members of congress. I vote no. You don't change policy for one incident. When congressmen are being gunned down on a regular basis, then we can talk. If we change nothing, the vast majority (99%+)of congressmen will be fine. In any case, we can't afford yet another federal agency.

Patriotic Millionaires for Fiscal Strength

It is Warren Buffet redux. Yes, 40 millionaires have banded together as the Patriotic Millionaires for Fiscal Strength and requested that their taxes be raised. When the Sage of Omaha proposed the same thing, I said he should just send the government a check. If these 40 want to pay more taxes, fine. Send in the money. The government will happily accept it and spend it. But demanding to have your taxes raised is also demanding that everyone else has their taxes raised.

 

These millionaires seem to believe what Joe Biden said: Paying taxes is patriotic. Hmm. This is a country founded on a tax revolt. Not paying taxes might be more patriotic. However, if they want to pay more, SEND IT IN and leave the rest of us out of your 'patriotism.'