The state of the dollar probably hasn’t been a first-tier political issue in the United States since, say, the presidential election of 1896. Back then, it manifested as whether or not America would stay on the gold standard or switch to a bimetallic one. (The William Jennings Bryan “cross of gold” speech and all that.)
The aftershocks of the global financial crisis may now be propelling the dollar back to the political forefront. The greenback’s continuing slide makes it a handy metric that neatly encapsulates America’s current economic troubles and possible long-term decline. House Republicans for instance, have been using the weaker dollar as a weapon in their attacks on the Bernanke-led Federal Reserve.
For more evidence of the dollar’s return to political salience, look no further than the Facebook page of Sarah Palin. The 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee — and possible 2012 presidential candidate — has shown a knack for identifying hot-button political issues, such as the purported “death panels” she claims to have found in Democratic healthcare reform plans. In a recent Facebook posting, Palin expressed deep concern over the dollar’s “continued viability as an international reserve currency” in light of huge U.S. budget deficits.
She might be onto something here, politically and economically. A recent Rasmussen poll, for instance, found that 88 percent of Americans say the dollar should remain the dominant global currency. Now, the average voter may not fully understand the subtleties of international finance nor appreciate exactly how a dominant dollar has benefited the U.S economy. But they sure think a weaker dollar is a sign of a weaker America.
And that’s the political problem for the Obama administration. Its benign neglect of the dollar is another example of an economic policy — along with TARP and the $787 billion stimulus — that the White House thinks is helping the economy, but many Americans find wrongheaded.
In his New York Times column today, Paul Krugman makes the usual case for a weaker dollar: It helps U.S. exporters and is a necessary part of a global economic rebalancing. And there is some truth in that, particularly the idea that Rising Asia will result in a less-dominant dollar. Then again, a devalued currency hasn’t exactly been a proven path to prosperity. (Ask Jimmy Carter.)
But Krugman too easily dismisses the idea that the dollar’s decline could tumble out of control. Former Clinton economic officials such as Robert Rubin and Roger Altman have been making the case that investor concern about budget deficits could lead them to abandon the dollar. As Altman argued in a Financial Times op-ed piece today: “The dismal deficit outlook poses a huge longer-term threat. Indeed, it is just a matter of time before global financial markets reject this fiscal trajectory. That could lead to a punishing dollar crisis.”
Now many Democrats and liberals, like Krugman, don’t want to hear such talk, fearing a rerun of the Clinton era when the progressive policy agenda was sacrificed on the altar of budgetary rectitude.
But that is a tremendous political and economic gamble, one that may result in taunting Republican cries of “Who lost the dollar?”
That’s a funny way to say “we’re still in a deep recession.” When the third round of layoffs went through my little company three weeks ago, the first thing I thought was, “Wow. That Obama, he’s really rescued the economy.”
Yeah, you rescued the economy, Obugger. That's why unclaimed dead bodies are stacking up in the Los Angeles County morgue because their relatives have so much money they’re just letting the government have the honor of footing the bill for the burials. That's why you need a federal toilet paper tax so you can pay for all those extra flushes you need to send just about every good business model down the crapper. That's why some New Yorkers could be paying as much as 60 percent of their income in taxes if you manage to Rahm your Obamacare plan through despite more than 50 percent of the population thinking you're the one we should send on the first manned mission to Mars, the sooner the better.
Yeah, you rescued the economy. That's why Detroit, one of the former symbols of economic ingenuity and craftsmanship and hard work, will now forever be a ghost town, when the only city deserving of such a fate is Washington, D.C. That’s why Michigan's unemployment is surging toward 20 percent, and at least 15 of your "57 states" just went over 10 percent unemployment last month. You know the economy is rescued when one in 5 state employees is collecting unemployment.
Yeah, you rescued the economy. That's why Cauli-for-nia's been sending out IOUs not only to citizens waiting for tax refunds but also to creditors waiting for the gubernator to pay the bills. That's why 27,000 criminals could be released on the streets of California because the economy is sooooo good they need extra workers to pick phantom crops that grew in our imaginations because you won't let farmers water their fields.
Yeah, you rescued the economy. That's why Joey "Slapstick" Biden's walking around talking about spending money we don't have in order to keep from going bankrupt. That's why you've been quietly telling people, who are just trying to stop you from making terrible policy mistakes because you haven't even read what your health care bills says, that they're going "to destroy [your] presidency." That's why it's not about you; it's about YOU.
Yeah, you rescued the economy. That’s why we have a cap and tax bill that would cost the average family $4,000 a year that won’t pass the Senate because members of your own caucus would rather wrap a rope around their necks and tie it to a parking meter and get in their cars and hit the gas pedal. That’s why no one’s buying cars from the shell of a company called Government Motors that you now effectively own because they must be waiting for the little one-seater 20 hp version of the Hummer to come out. That’s why Missouri Rep. Russ Carnahan got booed off the stage for telling baldfaced lies that your health care plan would actually MAKE the federal government money.
So while you’re up there pandering your $1.3 trillion or $3 trillion or $300 gazillion government takeover of my wallet and that of every other hard working American, while you’re up there worrying about your presidency being destroyed because you keep talking about getting so much done while little if anything (except government largess) gets done, while you’re up there wondering about your dwindling support among “conservative” members of your own party, among independents, among regular American people who don't have your elitist attitude but who are definitely waking up (finally), you may want to think about this:
This economy isn’t “rescued,” not by a long shot. And if it does get better while you’re still in office, remember that while your Waterloo moment may be coming you’ve still done enough damage in 6 months to leave us with plenty of reasons for years to come to invade China so we don't have to pay them back.
Now, if you’ll excuse me. I’m not very interested in hearing you speak tonight. I have a movie to watch to prepare for the future. It’s called Dumb and Dumber.
WASHINGTON -- The number of people searching for the term “economic depression” on Google is down, says a White House economic advisor. Fortunately, searches for other terms that indicate President Barack Obama’s popularity may be history are way up.
Larry Summers, a top economic adviser to Obama, claims that Google searches for “economic depression” have reached normal levels, a sure sign that the economic free-fall has ended. (Could the White House use anything less tangible and credible and more ridiculous to indicate the Obugger administration’s spending policies aren’t asinine?)
“We pledged at the time the Recovery Act became law that some of the spending and tax effects would begin almost immediately,” Summers said in prepared remarks (does anyone in this administration speak without the use of a teleprompter?). “Blah… blah… blah the impact of the Recovery Act blah… blah… blah… over time, peaking during 2010 with about 70 percent of the total stimulus provided in the first blah... blah... blah (even though we know damned well it won’t make a bit of difference, since states are out there using Obugger’s funny money to pay off their deficits and remodel historic properties and build turtle tunnels).”
An informal poll by Dr. Dave Reports, however, has revealed a startling spike in several indicators that point to the president’s popularity pretty much going down the toilet, where he’s been dragging the rest of the country for 6 months.
“This would indicate that more and more people are starting to realize what a buffoonish ass and unprepared, unqualified, unprofessional loon he is,” said Dr. Dave.
“Obama extortion” also appears to be a very popular Google search term these days.
“That pretty much clinches it for me,” Dr. Dave said. “I can’t think of a more appropriate term to describe this president than ‘extortionist,’ what with him reading the following threats daily (now) from VTOTUS: ‘we cannot afford to do nothing ... the status quo is unacceptable ... this WILL get passed.’”
First they denied it, then they ridiculed it...now they admit it while dismissing its relevance altogether in favor of a progressive agenda:Obama is not trying to fix the nation, he’s trying to destroy what’s left of American exceptionalism while using the economic disaster as his excuse and opportunity.
This week’s issue of Time Magazine boasted as its cover feature an article titled, “What Barack Obama Can Learn from FDR.”Basically, this means that the final conclusive idolatry has been had:Our great president is trying to emulate the man responsible for ushering in the failing socialist programs that we still fight today for financial breathing room.
The irony behind this article is that it dismisses the very myth that liberals have used as their cushion for years by stating that government spending during an economic crisis does not stimulate recovery, and using FDR’s “New Deal” as proof that it does is an absolute sham.In the author’s own words:
“It’s old news that FDR’s New Deal did not end the depression.”
Is it though?This author [yours truly] has been ridiculed, quite recently actually, for having made that suggestion a few articles back.Perhaps the commenter should take his argument up with Mr. David Kennedy also, the author of the Time article in question, for even he seems to agree on this point.If only Mr. Kennedy would have stopped there with his FDR worship fest.Alas, such was not the case and we must continue here...
An objective view of FDR’s policies would have been more welcome - even one spun in a positive light to ignore the fiscal and constitutional issues at stake with them.That’s expected.Kennedy however takes his suggestions to a level that is so absurd, they make the profanity-ridden Republican hit pieces in the Rolling Stone magazine seem credible.
Here are the most outrageous claims of Mr. Kennedy:
This is the consequence of pushing a $787 billion, 400-page bill through Congress and into law in less than three weeks. Under the economic recovery plan, laid-off workers and welfare recipients (blood suckers) have seen a $25 weekly bump in their unemployment/welfare checks as part of a broad expansion of benefits for the under-achievers. A record 32.5 million people now participate in the food stamp program, and 6.8 million on are on unemployment.
This is where it gets funny. The unforeseen result of giving out this extra money (which is costing our children $165,000 each), is that is goes above the cap for food stamp eligibility, so the extra money has pushed a lot people over the limit, and thus ineligible for hundreds of dollars a month in food stamps.
The perfect example is this guy; Mark Milota, 47, of Marietta, Ga., who was laid off in November from his job at a medical billing company. The Georgia Department of Human Resources explained in a letter to him last month that, because of the stimulus, he was ineligible for food stamps. He now makes an extra $100 each month, to bring his total to $1,538 a month in welfare -- $21 too much for a family of two to qualify.
Milota said he was told that, without the stimulus money, he would have received about $300 a month in food stamps. "I truly believe when it came out, they felt it was to help people, and they never wanted to hurt people," said Milota, who says he leans Republican but voted for Obama.
Lets see. He's been out of work since November. I used to live near Marietta. I was also on a salary a Little higher than what he gets from welfare (except I earn my money).
1). How is this guy having trouble.
2). Why has he not found another job yet? Any job. Burger King, Waffle House, etc.
Seven months. I was looking for a second job, it took me about two months of searching a little time here and their, but I found one. Oh boy and it is near Marietta also, only 10 miles away. Okay, lets give him the benefit of the doubt; No car. Well Marietta has a bus system. Not the best, but they have one. Atlanta ranks among the lowest as far as good transportation, but we have it. Anyone wonders why? It's Government run, and the City refuses to allow it to become privatized. God forbid a company comes in and makes it better.
Stacy Dean, director of food assistance policy at Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, (a liberal think tank group) said "People were aware of this but, as you recall, the stimulus was moving along and then it was passed in about a day, there was not a lot of policy discussion on this."
There's this myth about FDR's "New Deal" - you know the one where it got us out of the Great Depression?Anyone who's willing to delve into the depths of political incorrectness knows that's a load of you-know-what.The truth?WWII. Despite all the constitutionality and fiscal problems he got us into (and that we're still paying for), FDR did manage to save us from ourselves when he told us "We Can Do It".He went from milk dumping in the streets to remanufacturing the American Spirit - we've all seen that poster of Rosie the Riveter with her guns a blazin'...It's a great exemplary of the attitude of the day that we need to summon now.Let's embrace the industrial spirit from the "good war" and transform it into a spirit to propel us forward into a new generation of prosperity.Oh yeah - and maybe fix that little energy problem we keep crying over while we're at it.
If you have not heard or read about U.S. Senator Lamar Alexander's May 27, 2009 speech at the Tennessee Valley Corridor Summit on a nuclear power proposal, you are instructed to go read the transcript ASAP.He outlines some of the usual objections to nuclear power and offers basic rebuttals (you can Google more details).He explains why the various alternative energy proposals being thrown out there are not cost or space effective (read: wind and solar).He even quotes T. Boone Pickens - you know, the oil man that's been pushing a huge alternative-energy agenda lately - when asked if he wanted wind turbines anywhere on his 68,000 acre ranch: "Hell no.They're ugly."
The most important point however, is what his proposal could do for the United States as a whole:
1.Produce 70% of our own energy (vs. using 25% of the world's energy as we currently do) - can we say energy independence?
2.Save the planet - if you're into all the "global warming" hoopla, here's your answer:Nuclear power is clean!
3.Create millions of jobs!Let's get back into manufacturing people!We'll build a nuclear construction industry - it'll outlast any "shovel ready" highway project.Millions of jobs that will last 20 years+...what more can you ask for?
4.Economic recovery!Jobs (AMERICAN jobs I say!), cheap energy, no more oil wars...c'mon now!
You can't say that Obama's "Cash for Clunkers" or throwing billions into global warming research are better ideas.What do we need them for if we have nuclear efficiency?We have the solution, we have the means, and we have the spirit to get it done - let's do it!
After all...Barry wants to oh-so-badly be like France, right?
The biggest legal gambling city in the world is New York City.
Wall Street does literally billions of dollars a day in stock trades. What that really means is that people and institutions (with your money) are gambling that a certain stock will either go up or down depending on their objectives. But there is no sure thing. It is a gamble.
The casinos are the stock trading companies that handle the monies coming in and going out. They take their “house” share on every trade. They make millions, even billions in profits.
A CEO of one of the Wall Street casinos (a trader/gambler) that made a lot of money there but did not create one industry, factory, or job outside of Wall Street is now the Governor of New Jersey. When he ran for governor last time his public relations people held him out to be a Wall Street financial guru and he would solve the states financial problems. He failed miserably. He increased spending and taxes.
Gamblers gamble, they don’t open factories, adjust tax structures that favor industry and job growth. They don’t have it in them. They are self-centered and look to make money for their casino/stock trading companies.
Now Vegas Jon wants to run again for Governor of New Jersey. Hasn’t he done enough already by doing nothing right to reduce the tax burdens on the people of New Jersey. He wants four more years of increasing taxes, spending and having the middle class move out of state by the tens of thousands.
Enough already.
And remove the Democrats in Trenton also. They are also to blame for not standing up to him.
President Obama is announcing that he is going to "ramp up" the stimulus spending over the next three months. The improvement in consumer confidence seems to make the President think that his stimulus is working. I happen to think that perhaps consumer confidence in the economy is improving because we no longer are subjected to the President of the United States coming on television every day and declaring that we are in the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. (That of course was a lie.) Its amazing how people can have a little more faith that hell has not frozen over when our elected Leaders stop screaming about how the sky is falling. So far, we have spent $2.7 Trillion dollars. That is only what we have spent, not even what we have PROMISED to spend. This amount of debt is unbearable by any means. Let's give the President the benefit of the doubt and say that the stimulus was a great idea and the economy is going to bounce back as a direct result of it. My question now is, how do we go about paying all this money back? I know the President is busy planning even more spending on his universal health care, but how do you suppose he is going to pay off the debt? Well, let's look at our two options...
First, we do nothing and our currency inflates. The influx of money into our system will cause prices to rise more and more. Our salaries, of course, will not rise at the same level. This brings us to a sharp inflation of the dollar and the economy will suffer because of it. This will completely counter the stimulus measures that the President put into place and our economy will be even worse off than it originally was. Let's also not forget the world's confidence in the dollar will crumble. Some of our biggest Lenders will no longer want to gamble on our economy. (China, we're looking in your direction.) We can sit by and watch this happen, or...
We can pay off the ridiculous debt we have accumulated. Once again, let's assume the economy improves under the stimulus. This is all borrowed money that we used and since ignoring it will lead to another economic crisis, we can take the initiative and pay off our debt. We don't want to borrow even more money to pay off our previously borrowed money, so we do the only thing we can do raise the sufficient funds. Raise taxes substantially. (Or possibly set up a stand and sell pies to China.) Nothing can turn an economy flaccid quicker than a hefty tax hike. Unfortunetly, the President is going to have to do more than just tax the wealthiest five percent of the Country. If you took all the money owned by the wealthiest 5%, every last penny of it, it still wouldn't be enough to pay off this debt. We are going to have to have taxes raised on everyone, including businesses already struggling by the current economic crisis.
So as the title puts it, we have two options and neither looks fun. It is a true lose-lose situation, brought to you by the Democrats. The Reagan solution of lowering taxes significantly to stimulate the economy isn't looking so bad now, is it! Always remember, "Change" is NOT always a good thing.
The other night I was at the Mohegan Sun Casino (business unfortunately, not pleasure) and during some of my off time I decided to take advantage of the luxuries that were made available to me. While sitting in the poker room playing a few hands, my attention was split between my cards and the news playing in the plasma screen on the walls. I found myself distracted when they cut to a full screen graphic of a recent poll. This poll stated that 53% of Americans supported Capitalism to Socialism. That's right, only 53%! There were 27% of those polled who favored Socialism and 20% who weren't quite sure which they preferred. Now being the social person that I am, I decided to make a comment for the whole table to hear. As quickly as I made my statement, all around me the other players sprang up with their own opinions which were a healthy mix of Bush-bashing and snips about how Capitalism has basically failed America. I wanted to hear them all out. I didn't argue right away, I merely sat back and listened while I waited for my moment to strike. We continued to play as we spoke and a few hands later there was a big pot going on between four players on the table; three of them all-in with the pot close to five hundred dollars. I would love to tell you that I took all these liberals money but unfortunately it didn't work out that way. A gentleman who previously lectured me about the evils of capitalism happened to win the hand. I smiled to him and said "So your not a fan of capitalism, right?" He responded "No, not particularly." I said, "Ok, so you should only take half of that pot and split the rest among the table, after giving a portion of it to the house, right?" "Now why would I do that?," he replied. "Well you said you favor socialism," I said. "Well I'm not a huge fan of capitalism, but I don't think it is fair [for me to share the winnings]. I earned this pot," he said. I looked at him right in the eyes and said, "My point exactly." Now I know that this probably isn't the best example but I'm trying to point out the fact that there are people that are in favor of spreading the wealth, until it comes to them giving up their money. I saw this poker game as the economy and a parallel of how things work. Everyone starts out with different amounts of chips, just like everyone in life doesn't start at the same level. Based on decisions you make you can either gain or lose money (and even lose money with good decisions and vice versa). The monetary decisions that we make in our life affect where we end up. With every pot that is accumulated, the house, both in the Casino and in the economy, takes a portion of that. When we win a big pot it should be ours and we should not have to give back to the other players. I know it sounds a little abstract when you first read this but think about it. Maybe if more of those 47% of the poll could understand some of the basics of socialism and President Obama's economic policies, then they would fold their hand rather than playing and risking their own money, just to spread the wealth to the other players.
Recently, a Bill by Sen. Benjamin Cardin (D-MD) has proposed a "rescue" of American Newspapers. His Bill would allow certain newspapers to restructure as a non-profit, allowing several tax breaks to help strengthen the industry at the cost of the taxpayers. Obviously this was only a matter of time. Every industry out there is in line for their own bailout. I'm not opposed to this for the reason that many others are. Lots of Conservatives fear this would cement these newspapers as Liberal mouthpieces. This Bill would in fact stipulate that any newspapers receiving federal money would be restricted from making any political endorsements. Why newspapers, which are supposed to be objective, endorse any candidate in the first place is another topic. Every morning I read the newspaper on my way into work. Every night I ride the train home and look at nothing but my blackberry and read the news from there. Nine out of every ten people on my train also are reading from their phones, and most of them are doing that in the morning and the night. Perhaps we can consider the fall of our newspapers as a sign of innovationa nd technology. News up-to-the-minute is superior to news a day old. Instead of going in depth on this, here is one of the greatest scripted speeches in movie history. This is from the film "Other People's Money", and is spoken by Danny Devito to a room full of shareholders of a company he is trying to dissolve. It rings true to Sen. Cardin's Bill.
"This company is dead. I didn't kill it. Don't blame me. It was dead when I got here. It's too late for prayers. For even if the prayers were answered and a miracle occurred . . . and the yen did this and the dollar did that . . . and the infrastructure did the other thing, we would still be dead. You know why? Fiber optics. New technologies. Obsolescence. We're dead, all right. We're just not broke. And do you know the surest way to go broke? Keep getting an increasing share of a shrinking market. Down the tubes. Slow but sure. You know, at one time there must have been dozens of companies making buggy whips. And I'll bet the last company around was the one that made the best goddamn buggy whip you ever saw. Now, how would you have liked to have been a stockholder in that company? You invested in a business, and this business is dead. Let's have the intelligence--let's have the decency--to sign the death certificate, collect the insurance, and invest in something with a future.
"But we can't," goes the prayer. "We can't, because we have a responsibility, a responsibility to our employees, to our community. What will happen to them?" I got two words for that: who cares? Care about them? Why? They didn't care about you. They sucked you dry. You have no responsibility to them. For the last ten years, this company bled your money. Did this community ever say, "We know times are tough. We'll lower taxes, reduce water and sewer"? Check it out. You're paying twice what you did ten years ago. And our devoted employees who have taken no increases for the past three years . . . are still making twice what they made ten years ago. And our stock, one-sixth what it was ten years ago. Who cares? I'll tell you. Me. I'm not your best friend. I'm your only friend. I don't make anything? I'm making you money.
And lest we forget, that's the only reason any of you became stockholders in the first place. You want to make money. You don't care if they manufacture wire and cable, fried chicken, or grow tangerines! You wanna make money! I'm the only friend you've got. I'm making you money. Take the money. Invest it somewhere else. Maybe . . . maybe you'll get lucky, and it'll be used productively. And if it is, you'll create new jobs and provide a service for the economy and, God forbid, even make a few bucks for yourselves."
American Tusk is a site devoted to those amongst us who put Country before Party. We are true Republicans. American Tusk is dedicated to a smarter, stronger and better GOP. Together we can make our Country better and move forward optimistically into the future!
RSS Feed
