2.28.2011

Your industry are belong to us now

While Americans keep spending their bucks on plastic trinkets that will be obsolete in five years, the people selling those trinkets are turning around and buying things that matter...like our aircraft manufacturers.
Cirrus Industries Inc., parent company of Cirrus Aircraft, has been sold to China Aviation Industry General Aircraft Co. (CAIGA) of Zhuhai, China, but it appears the company will continue to build parts in Grand Forks, N.D., and assemble airplanes in Duluth, Minn.
We can all have a good laugh when our granddaughters are hiding in cargo holds to sneak into China and work in massage parlors. Blonde girls good price--sucky sucky!

At least we had fun toys back in 2008.

2.27.2011

GOP: Gentlemen on Parole

The headline is taken from a quote by Woody Woodrum, San Diego long-time Republican and O.T. (Original Tea-partier), in this Daily Caller piece on the American Policy Summit in Phoenix, where Tea Partiers vowed to hold Republicans to their promises. Woodrum's quote is exactly right. If these Republicans won't get the spending under control, we'll keep throwing them out until we find someone who will.

Our friend Leslie Eastman is at the summit and has posts here and here. Beers with Demo has more notes here.

Michael Barone: Americans want free markets, not crony capitalism

In a column that touches on the same themes I wrote about in Government-sponsored income inequality, Michael Barone writes:
The recoil in 2010 against the Obama Democrats' vast expansion of the size and scope of government seems to have a cultural or a moral dimension as well. It was a vote, as my Washington Examiner colleague Timothy P. Carney wrote last week, expressing "anger at those unfairly getting rich -- at the taxpayer's expense."

Those include well-connected Wall Street firms like Goldman Sachs that got bailed out and giant corporations like General Electric that shape legislation so they can profit. They include the public employee unions who have bribed politicians to grant them pensions and benefits unavailable to most Americans.

A government intertwined with the private sector inevitably picks winners and losers. It allows well-positioned insiders to game the system for private gain. It bails out the improvident and sticks those who made prudent decisions with the bill.

Modest-income Americans think this is wrong. They want it fixed more than they want a few more bucks in their paychecks.

The column starts out discussing how establishment politicians and academics are dumbfounded that the working class isn't falling for Obamunism. It's reminiscent of CNN "reporter" Susan Roesgen lecturing a Chicago Tea Partier that he should be thankful for the pork Obama is sending to Illinois.

2.26.2011

Stephanie Pomboy: Bernanke has blood on his hands

This weekend's Barron's has a great interview ($) with Wall Street strategist Stephanie Pomboy of MacroMavens. She says the Dirty Fed caused the financial crisis with easy money, the Dirty Fed created the commodity bubble with easy money, and the Dirty Fed is going to try to fix everything with the only thing it knows: more easy money.
If you look at the combination of higher rates and energy prices, we are really now running at levels that we haven't seen since just going into the financial meltdown. To quantify it, over the past six months, wage income is up $111 million, and outlays on food and energy are up $116 billion.

[...]

It is delicious in its irony, in a way, that QE is really the driver of this commodity bubble, because, obviously, when the Fed started putting rates to artificially low levels, everyone in the U.S. looked somewhere for higher yields. And the obvious place to go was emerging markets, and all the capital flowing into emerging markets fueled their economies and increased their demand for resources. At the same time, debasing the dollar obviously enhanced the allure of holding hard assets, which also benefited commodities. You can find any number of reasons why QE really drove the commodity boom. So if I'm correct that the Fed is going to have to continue this program to protect the U.S. recovery from these threats of higher rates, and food and energy prices, it is kind of ironic that they are going to be pursuing more aggressive quantitative easing, even though that is really what's driving higher rates and commodities.

[...]

If we pursue this logic to its natural conclusion, and the Fed continues with QE, it begets more of the same result, which is just to continue to inflate commodities. Then what happens is that we see commodity prices rise until they reach the point that something breaks. And my thesis is that, during my lifetime, interest rates have always been the catalyst for crisis. Rates backed up to the point that some weak link in the chain broke. This time, however, higher commodity prices will be the catalyst. But, again, it is deliciously ironic that these higher commodity prices are a function of overaggressive, easy monetary policy. In times past, it has always been tight monetary policy that has precipitated the crisis.

[...]

Q. What about the argument that Bernanke and his team had to do something or the economy was going to fall off a cliff, and that they had to create liquidity?

It is easy to sit back and say this. But had the Fed not had that attitude back in 2000, we wouldn't have been in this predicament. The problem is that we serially try to reflate our way out of these problems, rather than taking the pain and letting the economy actually cleanse itself.

This summer is going to be the beginning of the moment of truth. What happens when QE2 is done in June? Can the government go on running deficits of 10% of GDP without causing bond rates to go higher, crushing the recovery? Will the Dirty Fed come back in with QE3? Pomboy leans toward "yes," and given the Dirty Fed's track record, it's hard to disagree.

Pomboy recommends a barbell portfolio of gold and Treasuries. I still prefer cash over Treasuries. Buying Treasuries here is a high-risk, low-reward bet that rates will go a lot lower. With serial deficits in the same league as Greece, I wouldn't trust the U.S. government for 10 years at just 3.5%. What's the upside? If we get inflation, your bonds will get murdered. And if we tip back into severe recession, is that 3.5% really going to pay your Alpo bill?

2.25.2011

From the McDanger files

This weekend, Aaron Sorkin may well collect an Oscar or two for savaging the reputation of Mark Zuckerberg. But it's worth noting that Facebook has, in the last three weeks, done more to further freedom and democracy than Hollywood has done in the last one hundred years.

As the people of Tunisia, Egypt, and soon Libya can attest, their liberation is due not to leftist think-tanking or rightist bomb-dropping, but to the simple power of free communication and popular will.

And, having understood the misery of life without freedoms, they rightly rejoice and cling sweetly to a life with them. If only Americans could see as clearly.

Renew the Patriot Act? Sure, why not. Persecute Julian Assange? You bet. Highest incarceration rate in the world? Yep, that's us.

Land of the free, baby. You still drinking it?

-Charlie McDanger

2.24.2011

Budgeting for Bad Behavior

Mish posted a story from DetroitNews.com regarding Allen Park, Michigan and how the city sent lay off notices to their entire fire department. It's today's municipal budget reality but one piece of it really rubbed me the wrong way and I fear/imagine that many municipalities practice this.
According to McCurley [city finance director], the city faces a fiscal crunch because revenue in several areas has fallen short of projections. Collections from traffic tickets are $819,000 below what was budgeted, and ambulance billing collections are $200,000 under budget, he said.

Collections from traffic tickets?!? According to the census, this is a town with a population around 28,000 people and they were counting on collecting over $800,000 more than they did in parking tickets?!?

It is absurd that a municipality count on, actually hope that people act badly. And if they don't act badly, if they obey the law then, well, you have to lay people off. How perverse is that??

This isn't the first time I noticed this. In our post from February 9th we mentioned the LA Times budget game. In the game one of the budget items you can control is the projected revenue from installing cameras to fine people who run red lights:
Seriously have these municipalities and those running government lost their minds? You penalize people to STOP BAD BEHAVIOR. If you are successful, if what you did worked, you succeed in making the world a better place and the reward is no revenue because there are no violators. That's what you want! You do not count on bad behavior as A REVENUE STREAM, especially when it entails hoping people run red lights!

Politicians who count on bad behavior instead of attempt to prevent it are at the very least irresponsible, see Allen, MI. At the very worst maybe partially responsible for any horrible accidents that may occur, see California red light cameras.

I mean if you knew a particular street light intersection had frequent red light running violators, wouldn't you do what you could to stop the behavior? Or would you do nothing because the revenue from the tickets is just too sweet?

Bill Fleckenstein: Bernanke has blood on his hands

Dylan Ratigan throws Fleck a softball: Has the Dirty Fed caused commodity inflation?

Why does America keep winning?

X : Yes. But also, America's abundance of natural resources and history of fortuitous developments kinda seems like God shed His grace o...