Brent Nyitray
Fairlington Blade
Let the mutherfuker burn!
jnc4p
Kevin S. Willis
Michigoose
lmsinca
markinaustin
Arcanaut
novahockey
quarterback
ScottC
yellojktSlightly more Traditional Morning Report
| Last | Change | Percent | |
| S&P Futures | 1305.6 | 3.4 | 0.26% |
| Eurostoxx Index | 2413 | 27 | 1.12% |
| Oil (WTI) | 101.95 | .02 | –% |
| LIBOR | .561 | -0.001 | -0.20% |
| US Dollar Index (DXY) | 80.323 | -0.311 | -0.38% |
| 10 Year Govt Bond Yield | 1.9% | 0.0007% |
On the 10 Year Govt Bond Yield, Brent reported 1.85% yesterday, Bloomberg is the source for the “Change” report.- Via Mark with an assist from ashot
Thanks, Ashot! CPI is reported “unchanged” which means some stuff went up and some went down: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm
Housing starts are way below anticipated: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-19/u-s-housing-starts-fell-more-than-forecast-on-drop-in-multifamily-units.html
BUT: Jobless claims are the lowest in four years!
– Mark
Filed under: Uncategorized |
All Things in Moderation 
Test
LikeLike
dfgdg
LikeLike
Logging in is very strange on this site. Sometimes it thinks you have a blog that does not exist. I’m pretty confused.
LikeLike
dfgdg
Exactly. I couldn’t have said it better myself.
LikeLike
Good morning!
Glad to see banned and mcurtis joining.
Those who have piles of work to do this week, stay sane.
Illinois Gov.Pat Quinn has ordered the US and Illinois flags to be flown at half-mast today to honor a local national guardsman who was killed in action a year ago.
More in a bit.
LikeLike
“Weekly jobless claims moved sharply lower, while inflation remained tame and housing starts unexpectedly weakened in December, according to a set of data painting a mixed picture of the economic recovery.
Weekly unemployment benefit applications dropped to 352,000, the fewest in nearly four years.”
Mitt shouldn’t bother to release his returns. Unless Obama does some damn fool thing, this election is already over!
LikeLike
banned:
Unless Obama does some damn fool thing, this election is already over!
There are those here who would say this occurs on a too-frequent basis.
But I don’t get the tax returns thing. The Romney camp seems genuinely put off guard by this. C’mon! Releasing tax returns, whether appropriate or inappropriate, has been a part of the presidential candidate ritual for long enough that it should not be a surprise if someone brings it up.
I’m thinking maybe I’ll put together a list: “50 Questions Every Presidential Candidate Should Be Able to Answer Without Blinking”. Question #1 is “Why are you running and what distinguishes your candidacy?” One’s tax return is maybe about #20, but is definitely on the list.
LikeLike
Publish the 50 questions here, first, for valuable partisan, multipartisan, non-partisan, and post-partisan feedback!
No snark intended – this group could be your advisory board and you could hardly do better.
LikeLike
#53, Who’s the president of Ubecki-becki-becki-becki-stan-stan?
LikeLike
I never thought it mattered much because every person in the US pays as little taxes as they legally can. I guess it seems more “patriotic” somehow not to avoid them?
Anyway, I think the Romney ship has already sailed with Captain Schettino at the helm.
LikeLike
Again, since I’m recovering from login confusion.
Some people have the means to really shelter income. The way I view it is that I will have a gross income. After all taxes both federal and local (I do not get the cut off for SS) I might have 50% left. Romney might have 85% or more left. THAT is not fair to me.
LikeLike
Romney might have 85% or more left. THAT is not fair to me.
I’m not sure that it’s not fair, per se, or that the fairness is relevant. You don’t have to be a Mormon. That’s unfair to Mitt. Why is the percentage of income the yardstick for an ineffable fairness? Why not real dollars, in which case his income is insanely unfair to you? What is fair, outside of a loophole free flat tax? I’ve functionally got 3 dependents, which means I “keep” more of my gross income than if I were single and childless, which perhaps is unfair to the single and childless person, but then all of what I get to keep, and more besides, is spent on said dependents and their needs and expenses. Which seems unfair to me, meaning I should be getting more deductions! Even though, of course, it’s usually elective to get married and have children . . .
LikeLike
He has a massive more amount of spendable income left. I can give you my personal situation with general details. A daughter disabled on Medicaid (good luck with that crap). Two grandchildren living with us. Old house in Austin. Income levels not rising and so is my age in an industry that expects them young. Everyone has to deal with what they are dealt. If I could invest and squirrel away my earnings off-shore, pay invenstment consultants, people to do my taxes and so on I would if allowed to do so.
Yet I do not see Romney giving back to anyone but himself. Sorry ’bout that. I’m not down on the rich, i’m down on Romney and his BS.
LikeLike
Perry is going to drop out and endorse Newt in an hour.
http://thescoopblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2012/01/reports-rick-perry-expected-to.html
I wonder how much behind the scenes arm-twisting it took to do that.
LikeLike
From the Austin American-Statesman this morning:
“Perry and Gingrich have been friends for two years. Gingrich wrote the introduction to Perry’s book.”
It has been suggested here in Austin that this was in the works and timed for just before SC, to push Newt.
LikeLike
In fact, if I were one who believed half of what I heard in Austin, I would have predicted this from the day after NH.
LikeLike
Wow, so it’s Santorum, Newt and Mitt? So pretty much just Mitt. Is this over already?
LikeLike
Don’t forget Ron Paul He is going to siphon off his 10% to the bitter end.
LikeLike
Romney’s not having a good week! LOL
LikeLike
No, Ashot. If you talk to Rs in the south, all of them like Newt. He resonates with them. WMR is disliked. The south is the heart of the R party. Newt wins SC, and he then will find new sources of money – probably from TX and GA –
to compete in FL. Paul will not compete in FL.
If you watch R debates, Newt always “wins” if you are a southern R. I think NG wins SC now – one poll had him 3% ahead of WMR last night and rising.
LikeLike
I’m in the process of listening to the Ricochet podcast, where Ann Coulter mounts an impassioned defense of Mitt Romney. It’s interesting. I think Mitt takes it, when it’s all said and done.
LikeLike
I could never listen to Coulter. My head would bleed.
LikeLike
I’d love for the 50 questions to be a groups effort, mark.
For a look at democracy in action,
http://mirrors.5nines.com/stream/
It’s a webcam at the WI Gov’t Accountability Board as they deal with 3,300 pounds of recall signature paperwork.
LikeLike
Philly Fed moves up from 6.8 to 7.3.
Bye, bye Sean Hannity. Bye, bye Rush.
LikeLike
You mean their manufacturing index?
If so, that’s less than expected, isn’t it?
LikeLike
That’s why I hate the expectations game. It’s an improvement, slow and steady, which is what you want right now. The last thing we need is for everybody to raise hopes too fast and then the media will change everything to the disappointment story.
LikeLike
John- any chance you can explain this a bit more? I do not pay any attention to Hannity or Rush.
LikeLike
LOL
I’m just saying good bye to all my fanatical right wing friends as the economy improves and their dreams of suzerainty sail away with Captain Schettino at the helm
LikeLike
Bye, bye Sean Hannity. Bye, bye Rush.
After Rush’s 20+ years at the golden EIB microphone, I don’t think economic improvements, or the re-election of Obama, are going to do anything to either of ’em.
LikeLike
Oh, of course, I was just being symbolic.
LikeLike
On top of Perry dropping out and endorsing Gingrich comes word that one of Gingrich’s ex-wives has given an interview to ABC. She had indicated she could shut down his campaign with one interview.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/18/abc-marianne-gingrich-interview_n_1214814.html?ref=media
LikeLike
HAH! She must have seen him “with” an underage lover, perhaps of his own gender, and have time stamped photos.
Nothing else would do.
LikeLike
one of Gingrich’s ex-wives
Ah yes, but homosexuals would destroy the sanctity of marriage. It will be interesting to hear what she has to say, but if the economy continues to improve does anything else matter?
LikeLike
but if the economy continues to improve does anything else matter?
A credible primary challenge for Obama (I think that ship has sailed, though) or a credible 3rd party challenger to Obama’s left. Otherwise, challengers don’t unseat incumbent presidents–especially when the previous occupant of the Whitehouse was from the opposing party.
LikeLike
Ashot, if the economy continues to improve, BHO wins, but lots of other stuff continues to matter!
For example, I believe Panetta (who lookls a bit like Tony Bennett) when he says our Navy will not allow the Straits of Hormuz to be closed. That matters.
LikeLike
The expression used to go caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy. Hope no one is offended.
LikeLike
Just don’t google ‘Kip Carter”.
LikeLike
Housing starts are way below anticipated:
My family (much of it is) is, or was, in housing construction, and they’ve been saying housing starts are going to be in the toilet for years to come. It’s not below what they anticipated. 😉
LikeLike
I have found housing to be a very local issue. We hear about the states where it’s in the tank, but that’s not even the majority of them.
LikeLike
FWIW, The interview with Marianne, Gingrich’s 2nd wife, will air tonight on ABC’s “Nightline”.
Newt apparently asked her for an open marriage right about the time he was blasting Bill Clinton on moral values.
LikeLike
Newt always has one. Marianne, of ALL people should have realized that! This won’t hurt him.
LikeLike
Newt apparently asked her for an open marriage right about the time he was blasting Bill Clinton on moral values.
At least he asked. However, this is an interesting revelation. How liberal of Newt.
I have views of Bill Clinton’s character, lack of life experiences, and attitudes towards women that I consider. On those personal issues he may have matured, but would we know?
The whole mess generated by the Republicans at that itme was just a total waste of time. I could see not one contstitutional violation that warranted impeachment. It did keep congress idle for quite a while.
LikeLike
So Gingrich is in favor of polygamy?
LikeLike
Don’t go wandering down the polygamy/polyamory/monogamish path. It’s a nest of subtle distinctions and rationalizations.
LikeLike
mc:
Even though we sometimes disagree, glad to see you here!
LikeLike
If everyone agreed it would be a boring place.
LikeLike
If you missed it yesterday:
“Confessions of a Leveraged Finance Jerk”
http://www.cnbc.com/id/46043793
John Carney is really good.
LikeLike
Elsewhere, here’s Reuters’ take on the various scenarios facing holders of Greek debt.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/19/us-markets-greece-scenarios-idUSTRE80I10D20120119
My bro and s-i-l were considering a Greek vacation in mid-June. They are now concerned the turmoil there might not be what they’re looking for. Ironically, they had also considered an Italian cruise and that’s also no longer on their short list.
LikeLike
The VIX dropped almost 7% today so far, on continuing good news inlcuding succesful bond auctions in Europe. I don’t like it. Too much too fast.
LikeLike
Ironically, they had also considered an Italian cruise and that’s also no longer on their short list.
That reminds me…Kevin, are you still planning on a Disney Cruise. Having second thoughts after what happened in Italy (aka Titanic II)?
LikeLike
When the captain of the ill fated Costa Concordia was asked if he knew where he was going he replied “off course”.
Costa Concordia – the only place where you are guaranteed to get your drink on the rocks.
Anybody else hear about that waiter working on the Costa Concordia? He had been praying for a big tip.
On the Costa Concordia all the rooms are Ocean View.
LikeLike
It’s a Carnival Cruise (who owned the company that ran the Costa Concordia). And, no, I suspect it will be fine. Unless they all start sinking, then I might reconsider.
LikeLike
Really good blog here: http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/19/keystone-xl-pipeline-blown-way-out-of-proportion/
“In November 2011, the CSIS Energy and National Security Program published a Commentary on the undue political attention being placed on this pipeline as a proxy for the larger energy issues being debated in the country, and we still largely stand behind that analysis. In many ways, the importance of the decision to grant or deny the permit has been blown way out of proportion. The pipeline is neither the savior of U.S. energy security nor the death knell to U.S. low-carbon energy policy. With or without the pipeline, a few basic facts remain unchanged.”
LikeLike
Seems to be I’ve said/written that before. LOL
The tar sands oil is coming to market. It’s just a question of in which direction it gets there.
In that respect it is similar to the hulabaloo over the swipe fees, portrayed as a consumer thing, when it was just about dividing money between big banks and big retail.
LikeLike
Are you speaking of the $5 BoA fee for debit card purchases?
We use debit cards in that fashion. Frankly it is easier than writing a check. They want to charge us for using it, I’ll go back tto writing checks. (I wonder if processng checks costs them more. I doubt it since there is now an immediacy to that. But I would save myself a usage fee.)
LikeLike
Not exactly. Do you recall when Dick Durbin did a regulatory attack against the swipe fees charged by banks? He acted like the charge if reduced, would be a consumer win, when in reality it just gave more money to the big retailers.
http://durbin.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/localnews?ContentRecord_id=717a4e2b-2958-460a-9929-c30e7995c6fd
All lies from start to finisih!
LikeLike
Not exactly. We had a nice double header of commercials in the DC area. The warm-up act was Big Banks vs. small retailers. The night game was local credit unions vs. Big Retailers.
One could always save the money by using a p-i-n, which is why that’s the first option when using a debit. I’d be happy with transparency (in taxes or cards). The retailer charges $N for the goods and one pays a fee based on whatever the cost is associated with that form of payment.
BB
LikeLike
No. I do not recollect that at all. I don’t see how a reduction would provide MORE money to these people. I guess I’m daft.
LikeLike
We’re not selling the steak, but the sizzle.
LikeLike
OT, I’m applying for SS right now……weird feeling.
LikeLike
You didn’t have to set up an account in the Caymans for it, did you?
LikeLike
I thought about it but I can’t get any time off work to check it out. Maybe my new eviction lawyer we hired yesterday can set it up for me.
LikeLike
On line, or in line?
LikeLike
On line…..done
LikeLike
And it was so easy. Just think back before there was anything “online.”
LikeLike
JNCP, I just saw your colloquy with Ethan at PL. You were perfectly straightforward with him and he was a perfect ass in response. I think he may be unstable. It is entirely apart from disagreeing with you about WMR, I think.
I could be wrong.
But Ethan, obviously, cannot.
LikeLike
Who is Ethan? I don’t know these people by real names.
LikeLike
ronnie and rush
LikeLike
That’s one guy that over-the-top and then Beach is busy cluttering the joint up.
I don’t think many on PL read carefully was written prior. Also if one is not clear to not be afraid to ask questions.
There is a lot of “can I top you” going on. I did like yellow’s response to why Romney does X though. Great for a laugh with the dog joke.
LikeLike
Got a time/date for the conversation? I can’t help myself.
LikeLike
In response to skipsailing:
Why do Romney and others use the Caymans?
The same reason that dogs lick themselves. Because they can.
—————————
I also think I have finally managed to get on beach’s bad side. Took long enough.
LikeLike
didn’t see anything there.
LikeLike
I find that the calmer I remain, the more irritated they get. Certain factual misrepresentations I have to challenge though.
LikeLike
Don’t confuse facts with interpretations of events. I see that error made far too often.
LikeLike
I’m not sure about the time frame, but when I first showed up at Plum Line Ethan zeroed in on me and really was just as nasty and thuggish as you can be in a verbal exchange, and apropos of nothing, to where folks like Liam were telling him to cut it out. And he was always a complete dick to me. Then he came back, and apparently decided to tone it down. I missed today’s exchange, things have been very busy for me.
LikeLike
“The Federal Reserve is likely to step in with $1 trillion worth of easing that could be announced as soon as this month, according to a growing consensus of economists who see the recent uptick in economic growth as unsustainable.”
My prediction was for only 800 billion. Sorry to have let you guys down!
LikeLike
Motion to kick John out of ATiM!
LikeLike
I can do better, I promise!
LikeLike
“I can do better, I promise!”
Seen on Obama re-election button.
LikeLike
Nova,
***snort***
LikeLike
Does anyone have a bigger context for this video? I really want to be sure I understand the broader picture.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/01/mitt-americas-right-and-youre-wrong-111486.html
LikeLike
It’s going viral I think. PL is talking about it. The Republican race for president, which I didn’t think could get any sadder (er, funnier) is great reality TV. We have Newt with the open marriage. Perry getting out and endorsing “open marriage” Gingrich. Perry saying that Romney’s flip on abortion was really a flop. Romney is now saying that protestors are not American.
Oh, and why is the “t” in Colbert silent?
Is the moon full?
LikeLike
why is the “t” in Colbert silent?
Apparently he started pronouncing it that way in high school. The rest of his family does not.
LikeLike
I think someone showed Romney this video, and said this is how he should react to anybody questioning him:
(Transcript)
Otter: Point of parliamentary procedure!
Hoover: Don’t screw around, they’re serious this time!
Otter: Take it easy, I’m pre-law.
Boon: I thought you were pre-med.
Otter: What’s the difference?
[Addressing the room]
Otter: Ladies and gentlemen, I’ll be brief. The issue here is not whether we broke a few rules, or took a few liberties with our female party guests – we did.
[winks at Dean Wormer]
Otter: But you can’t hold a whole fraternity responsible for the behavior of a few, sick twisted individuals. For if you do, then shouldn’t we blame the whole fraternity system? And if the whole fraternity system is guilty, then isn’t this an indictment of our educational institutions in general? I put it to you, Greg – isn’t this an indictment of our entire American society? Well, you can do whatever you want to us, but we’re not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America. Gentlemen!
[Leads the Deltas out of the hearing, all humming the Star-Spangled Banner]
LikeLike
banned just committed a felony under SOPA.
LikeLike
Wearing ties in college seems so quaint.
LikeLike
nova is a tattletale!
LikeLike
I think you have to have a blind fold on for certain sites under SOPA……………………with a web cam watching to make sure you don’t peek.
LikeLike
“nova is a tattletale!”
the Hopenstasi is everywhere.
“Wearing ties in college seems so quaint.”
Friends who went to UVA wore ties to football games, which I understand is a very southern thing.
As a grad from northern D-III school, we just drank to ignore how cold it was.
LikeLike
Full moon was Jan. 9.
Didn’t know it was on PL. I haven’t stopped by since this morning.
Does anyone know what was going on prior to that clip? How much heckling went on? What Romney was talking about as he worked the crowd?
LikeLike
http://www.salon.com/2012/01/19/watch_mr_one_percent_snap_at_a_99_percenter/singleton/
May this help. I can’t watch right now.
LikeLike
Color me the curmudgeon here, but I think WMR’s response is politically astute, and is a way to wrap himself and anyone who likes him in the flag. I doubt that SC R primary voters – except for the Paulites – disagree with WMR.
I also thought Perry was politically astute in defending the pissing Marines. The pissed on were dead. This is a protocol breach and probably merits an Article 15, not a felony prosecution under Article 134. And its been a long time since I defended a court martial, but I am sure not pissing on a dead body is a directive, not part of the UCMJ. If the command structure is really embarrassed, they may try to make an example of the pissers, but those guys do not deserve more than a wrist slap. IMHO. And in Perry’s. And I suspect in the eyes of all the military families in SC.
The guy who posted the video? I dunno about him.
Everyone here knows my great joy at Goodhair’s demise and my disdain for WMR, so I feel free to defend them.
LikeLike
That eruption may have been calculated to shift the conversation away from his taxes and to a more American flag and apple pie topic. But I’m not sure Mitt is really smart enough to pull it off.
LikeLike
I really have no defense for him in this situation. I guess in certaini eyes it might look great. Politically astute? The only way I see this is to shift the news to poor behavior vs. his tax returns. (yellowjkt pointed this out) It doen’t come off as something a REAL human-being who wants to help the country to start decided who is American or not based on whether they are protesting or not.
History has lots of reference for for this resulting in the failure of the Federalist party in one instance I can think of.
LikeLike
“I am sure not pissing on a dead body is a directive, not part of the UCMJ. If the command structure is really embarrassed, they may try to make an example of the pissers, but those guys do not deserve more than a wrist slap. IMHO.”
Agreed. Just think if they had pooped on a DB….
LikeLike
OK, number 6 on my list of “50 Questions Every Presidential Candidate Should Be Able to Answer Without Blinking” will be:
How do you respond to a heckler in a crowd who’s never going to vote for you?
C’mon, Mitt! Talk about jobs. Talk about fiscal responsibility. Talk about keeping Iran from going nuclear. This is a puff-ball moment where you can shine!
LikeLike
You are better scripted than WMR.
LikeLike
The right answer, without blinking, is this:
If I am elected, I will listen to you and to every American voice.
I will try to represent the majority of Americans.
I will uphold and obey the Constitution.
I will not be a 1% POTUS, any more than were FDR, JFK, or Teddy Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan.
LikeLike
Mark for President. You did what Romney was not able to do.
That tells me lot about Romney.
LikeLike
mcurtis: lms and I have already nominated him at least twice. He ignores us, too.
LikeLike
Exactly. Here’s a guy who bobs and weaves during the debates and tries to land a punch on an actual voter. *facepalm*
LikeLike
The “heckler” asked Romney, “What will you do to support the 99 percent even though you are part of the 1 percent?”
Romney responded, ” Lemme tell ya something. America is a great nation, because we’re a united nation and those who are trying to divide the nation as you’re trying to do here and as the president is doing are hurting this country, seriously. The right course for America is not to divide America, and try and divide us between one and another, it’s for us to come together as a nation. And if you’ve got a better model, if you think China is better, or Russia is better, or Cuba’s better, or North Korea’s better, I’m glad to hear all about it. But you know what? America’s right, and you’re wrong!”
The response makes little to no sense in the context of the question. What exactly is the heckler wrong about? If we criticize America and are unhappy with its current status, we prefer China or Russia or Cuba better? And this is seen as something that will help Romney?
LikeLike
It’s called the Otter Defense, see above
LikeLike
ashot: It’s a OWS heckler. So this has to do with the atmosphere he’s in. If he fires off this way during a campaign (I have to harken back to a primal scream that hurt one presidential candidate for some odd reason) then how is he going to behave in real leadership situatoins with his cabinat or even international people?
The political stage in the world is not really for a hot-headed businessman.
LikeLike
The response makes perfect sense if you believe that this group is trying to engage the country in class warfare and encourage wealth redistribution (or as my family calls that – theft). My response would have probably been similar but I would have added something like encouraging the 1% to create more jobs.
Actually, I probably would have engaged the heckler and asked what he had been doing to help himself, his family and his community, how many positions he had applied for, how many hours he spent looking to either work or create work vs sitting around condemning the 1%. One of the things I am teaching my kids is that just because you have the right to do something does not necessarily make it the right thing to do. They have every right to protest and advocate for greater wealth redistribution…Romney and I both happen to believe that that is bad for America.
LikeLike
Hmmm. Nice use of terms. I never used “wealth ditribution” at all. Why did you bring that into the argument? Why did you assume this was the goal of OWS. This use of provocative terms makes debate nearly impossible.
LikeLike
wealth redistribution is going on now, as the people at the top amass a greater and greater share of the pie. If that is not distasteful, why is it distasteful when people propose changes that will reverse the flow?
LikeLike
“wealth redistribution is going on now, as the people at the top amass a greater and greater share of the pie. If that is not distasteful, why is it distasteful when people propose changes that will reverse the flow?”
Yes, and it is being done via tax laws. This is what needs to chang. The distribution argument can and does go both ways. Using that erminology just smacks of Ayn Rand.
LikeLike
Well, if we’re going to talk about the Presidential campaign, I think these guys have a great suggestion!
We could do worse. . .
LikeLike
And we well may.
During the ACA debate, when some argued for single payer, I argued that our Federal gummint was not up to the job, but CA had long experience and if we could contract out national health insurance to them maybe I could support it, b/c they seem to have gone beyond the early days of bad service and inefficiency that we would surely face for decades here if we tried it.
LikeLike
Before I watched the vid, I thought you were talking about California Mark…………………..lol. I thought you were having a senior moment.
LikeLike
Oh, and MsJS:
I made a page for you–for all of us to contribute to and for you to decide the final order. It’s a new tab at the top of the blog. 🙂
LikeLike
Illinois raised income taxes by 67% and they’re still Over 8.5 Billion in the hole.
Meh, ain’t nuthin’ can’t be solved by another increase, no?
LikeLike
Do we know why? I mean, nuts and bolts, why? Did they raise spending? Did people not pay their taxes? Did business flee the state? Did the recession go deeper in IL in 2011 than in 2010? Did someone steal the cash? Was the hole previously deeper or more shallow?
TMW, I thought Perry was right to say that pissing on the dead was not a very big deal. Did you?
LikeLike
Mark,
The article says that the first 4 billion are due to a backlog of bills a d the other 4 billion is due to “Those other outstanding bills include tax refunds, employee health insurance, and bills that have not yet reached her desk.”
As far as the Marines pissing on the dead, Perry is correct in his defense. This is not the warcrime of the century.
LikeLike
@mark:
Nuts and bolts why is a looooooong story. I will provide links/anecdotes from my 40+ years here soon.
Right now dinner calls.
LikeLike
Thanx, MSJs, I know you know IL well.
LikeLike
Oooh oooh it’s great! Thanks, Michi!
Everyone, plz slot in your questions. click on the “50 Questions” tab at the waaaaay top of the page. Leave your name next to it if you wish, or remain anonymous.
LikeLike
I put a couple of questions in, but not sure if they are the type you have in mind. Feel free to revise them.
LikeLike
Personal request to NoVA: Can you repost the “Libertarianism for Dummies” in the Link Dump? I was not finished with it and want to revisit. I’m with mark, I may well vote Libertarian if neither the Rs or Ds disavow NDAA indefinite detention of US citizens and similar civil rights. But I need to check it out more.
ashot, sorry about the Pistons and realize that must be very painful. Difficult season for them so far, but they’ve got some company down there.
LikeLike
mcurtis:
Hmmm. Nice use of terms. I never used “wealth ditribution” at all. Why did you bring that into the argument? Why did you assume this was the goal of OWS. This use of provocative terms makes debate nearly impossible.
“Wealth redistribution” is a provocative term? Is there a less provocative term for taking money from some people and giving it to others?
LikeLike
It’s called taxation. Death and taxes have always been in existance and call it what you will, it’ll always be here. This “wealth redistribution” is just a silly phrase that is really meaningless and presents a conspiratorial state of mind.
So let’s understand something right off the bat. People from England (to name one country) settled here and brought their common laws with them. They taxed each other in order to have a civic system that they all shared. Should someone be destitute they taxed the community in order to support that person. They demanded Inns in each town buy law. We have always been spending money in one form or another in order to support our communities and country.
Using the term you use simply muddies the waters and makes discussion impossible because it carries baggage.
LikeLike
mcurtis, all taxation and spending lead to wealth distribution. I would argue that it generally leads to distribution out of the middle class – more up than down, if you don’t include SS and medicare, and maybe even if you do. We do not limit discussion here, generally, but we do try to define terms. This is not a “liberal” or “conservative” blog, so it is always fair here for a liberal to ask a conservative or a conservative to ask a liberal to define terms.
Scott, a libertarian investment banker who votes R, will ask you to define terms when you use shorthand. And you can ask Dave! to define “wealth distribution”. But we generally do not place phrases off limits b/c they are favored short hand of someone but not another.
For the record, I too think taxation is the cost of civilized society, and that SS and medicare and unemployment compensation are now proven programs upon which we rely, not for a handout, but to stabilize society and the economy. But not everyone must agree with us, and we get to discuss that here without rancor.
Words and phrases are not off limits unless they are “fighting words” or personal attacks.
LikeLike
There is, in my experience, a tendency from libertarian groups, Ayn Randian groups to use wealth distribution in the way that means leveling. I’ve seen this more often than not. Since I see it with this meaning 90% of the time this is how I react to it. If we allow such terms to go on then we all have different definitions and biases. Should we see the reality for what it is we must deal with the tax code and decide how we, as citizens of this country want it to reflect us. I tend to not use short hand and am pretty to the point so that my meaning is very clear. I guess one factor that is a negative for me is that I know exactly what these words mean and they are indicators right off the bat.
This is also a very apparent problem in Congress for whgat you call “short-hand” is used all the time in statements and in obfuscations shouted out to the constituents.
I can pull back, but I’m not wearing rose colored glasses.
LikeLike
We do not limit discussion here, generally, but we do try to define terms.
A perfect example was Sunday’s thread where we have been debating for four days now the definitions of “altruism” and “self-interest”. Right now I’m losing the debate based on consensus, but not my argument, which I think is sound. 😉
LikeLike
All arguments devolve to definitions. I don’t know whether it was here or PL but we had a humdinger over denier/skeptic when it comes to AGW.
LikeLike
yj, mike curtis is here in Austin. Next time you know you are coming to town, I’ll take both of you to lunch – or maybe dinner.
LikeLike
Thanks for invite. I’m in Austin about once a month but it’s usually with a coworker who is unaware of my secret life as an internet troll, but I will let you know if I ever have some free time.
LikeLike
In Austin, TX? With a local to take you to the best watering holes?
I’d dump the co-worker in a heartbeat–tell them you’ve got a work deadline to meet and let them sweat it while you’re out with Mark and mcurtis on the town!!
LikeLike
Yikes! No new posts all day. You probably know my personal emphasis of the moment (erosion of civil liberties). I’m interested in what our “righties” as well as others think about this. Is it worth working up a post? Maybe just some comments?
Watched the R debate tonight. Seemed to me the gloves came off, and it got pretty cutthroat at times. Anybody else watch? I didn’t keep notes, but there were some statements that really struck me. One example: in a litany of what Obama is doing wrong (notable that Romney has already pivoted sharply to the general election), Romney included that Obama “wants the government to run this country.” Really? As to opposed to whom or what? The government is the surrogate for the people as expressed by our votes.
LikeLike
Is it worth working up a post? Maybe just some comments?
Absolutely worth it. I’m not sure anyone here disagrees that it’s a dangerous path, but what I’d like to know is who currently in Congress, or running for the House or Senate, is making this an issue. I’m not ready to vote for a Libertarian yet, but I’d love to know why this isn’t a campaign issue at least.
LikeLike
I have a couple of ideas for posts, but haven’t had time to work them up yet. Anyone else?
LikeLike
mcurtis:
So let’s understand something right off the bat.
Yes, let’s.
Taxes are used to accomplish different ends. Some taxes are used to pay for public goods like military protection, roads, border patrol, etc. These may result in some degree of wealth redistribution, for example one person may get more value out of a given road than another person who paid the same taxes. But redistribution itself is not the purpose.
However, sometimes taxes are used to provide individual goods to people, such as welfare, or medicare, or tuition grants, or any of a thousand other things that the government pays for. When this occurs, not only is wealth redistribution occurring, wealth redistribution is the very purpose of the policy…to take wealth from some people and give it to targeted others.
Perhaps you are unaware, but much of the political debate in this country centers around the distinction between these two uses of taxes, and what the proper role of government is in relation to them. In order to have that debate, it is useful to have terms to refer to them, and redistribution of wealth is actually quite a sensible label for the latter, because, well, like I said, redistribution of wealth is the precise purpose of the policy. To proclaim, in an exact inversion of the truth, that such clarifying language “muddies the waters”, and to attempt to ban it from the conversation, is simply to attempt to avoid one of the central political disputes of the day.
LikeLike
Scott, as you know, I think your distinction is arbitrary. I view many public expenditures for education and for health as investments in human capital that pay off for society as a whole with perhaps more bang for the buck than some of the public expenditures you distinguish as purely public. For example, the defense budget alone is far larger than the combined budgets of all the states for public education, but I think an economist of any stripe would argue that having a literate educated mobile work force is as important as having roads and canals for commerce or stockpiles of weaponry.
You also know that I am for a strong defense. I think that is one of the pillars of our society that would fall apart if we did not attempt near universal public education, in the first instance.
We will still be having this argument years from now and you will convince me that some government programs are wasted or better handled privately, because that is surely true. But I will not write off public education or public health as wealth distribution for the sake of wealth distribution.
I might, however, say that paying big farms big subsidies, or subsidizing big oil is wealth distribution that has outlived its original purpose and has now become wealth distribution for its own sake, by inertia. I do recall original purposes for both, however, so I am drawing lines based on shifts in history, not ideological preconceptions [In My Own Enlightened Opinion, of course].
LikeLike
Mark:
I think an economist of any stripe would argue that having a literate educated mobile work force is as important as having roads and canals for commerce or stockpiles of weaponry.
I suspect that an economist of any stripe would also argue that having a well clothed and well fed workforce is equally important. Does that mean that you would support public “investment” in, say, government run clothes and food stores where people can get their clothes and shoes for “free”, like public schools?
Lots of private actions may redound to the benefit of society as a whole (to the extent that the phrase has any real meaning). That doesn’t mean that such actions either need to be or ought to be subsidized by the government. Nor does it render the distinction between public goods and individual goods to be arbitrary.
LikeLike
Scott, if you think of a population as a national asset, then cultivation of that asset is an investment.
I am a capitalist and believe in open competitive markets. History shows us that competitive open markets produce and allocate goods and services in a generally more efficient manner and in a way that encourages productivity.
For me, there are many exceptions to that general rule:
“Natural monopolies” are an exception. Still, in the old days of telephone, regulated monopoly worked better for us than state owned telecom worked in the rest of the world.
“Litigation of small claims” is now an exception. The legal overhead of a claim worth less than $500K pretty much closes the federal courthouse door in America to “small” claims, except as shake the trees extortion. This is not working for plaintiffs or defendants, in so many ways.
“Education” is an exception. It can no longer be generally provided at a cost most consumers can afford, even in a private competitive market. The private market for education is only available to the top half of consumers. From pre-K through college, it is structurally impossible to provide cheap education. I thought computers and the internet would change that for the cheaper, but despite some outstanding examples of how that might work, education costs continue to soar.
“Health care” is an exception. Having made public the part of the market that is no longer employed, to the relief of the insurers, health care insurance remained affordable for fifteen years, but then skyrocketed as the cost of the care itself grew three times as fast as inflation. I do not see “single payer” as a solution. Creating a monopsony might “help” bargaining power for the purchasers, but the cost of delivery of care will continue to escalate if the delivery model remains the same. The “free market” is not working here to make more service available at competitive rates.
Where the free market has failed to produce production and allocation of good or services that are essential for the population asset I am willing to look at alternatives. I am willing to look at market driven alternatives that have not been tried, as well.
But food, clothing, and shelter are produced and allocated quite well by the markets. During WW2, when allocation would have been a problem because of shortages, rationing was imposed. In an emergency like that, I would support government intervention.
Again, calling a tax paid for road a “public good” but a tax paid for education system a “private” one is a distinction I don’t buy. I don’t buy it because as with education, the free market cannot and will not support, by itself, public roads and highways and canals and ports sufficient to a great and vast nation.
LikeLike