All Things in Moderation

Morning Report 11/1/12

20 Responses

1. 

   jnc4p, on November 1, 2012 at 8:27 am said:

   “But what about all of the construction workers that will be hired to rebuild? More of a Q1 event, though overall, not enough to offset the balance sheet effects. Refer to the Broken Window Fallacy. ”

   But Brent, you are forgetting the magic of the multiplier. If the government is the one spending the money then it has double the economic impact than if someone else does it.

   LikeLike

   Reply
2. 

   Brent Nyitray, on November 1, 2012 at 8:47 am said:

   obama’s proposed Secretary of Business has a “binders full of women” feel to it, doesn’t it?

   LikeLike

   Reply
3. 

   Mike, on November 1, 2012 at 8:48 am said:

   Welcome back, Brent. You work in the city, right? How long did it take to get to work today?

   LikeLike

   Reply
4. 

   jnc4p, on November 1, 2012 at 9:54 am said:

   “Brent Nyitray, on November 1, 2012 at 8:47 am said:

   obama’s proposed Secretary of Business has a “binders full of women” feel to it, doesn’t it?”

   I think it was bad phrasing, but as I read the full proposal it was to consolidate existing departments down, not add a new one. He would have been better served to have simply stated that he wanted to consolidate all business related agencies in the Federal Government into the Commerce Department.

   “We should have one Secretary of Business, instead of nine different departments that are dealing with things like giving loans to SBA or helping companies with exports,” Mr. Obama said in an interview that aired Monday on MSNBC. “There should be a one-stop shop.”

   Mr. Obama blamed Congress for such consolidation not happening during his first term because lawmakers have been “very protective about not giving up their jurisdiction over various pieces of government.” But the president has done little to push the idea himself.

   http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/10/29/obama-suggests-secretary-of-business-in-a-second-term/

   Reducing the number of federal agencies is fine with me.

   LikeLike

   Reply
5. 

   Brent Nyitray, on November 1, 2012 at 9:56 am said:

   Thanks, Mike. I work in Stamford, CT so I didn’t have to go into the City. I did however have to take a very circuitous route to work as we still have major roads that are still blocked.

   We made it through fine in Westchester County, but it looks like the apocalypse and there are still downed power lines all over the street. My guess is that NYSEG won’t even get to us until Sunday or Monday.

   LikeLike

   Reply
6. 

   Brent Nyitray, on November 1, 2012 at 9:58 am said:

   jnc, you’re right, but it has this “Gorillas in the Mist” – “we must study these strange alien creatures called businesspeople and learn their ways and customs” feel to it.

   LikeLike

   Reply
7. 

   Michigoose, on November 1, 2012 at 10:36 am said:

   I thought that this consolidation of departments business-related was something that was originally floated months ago. Am I misremembering?

   And very good to see you back, Brent!

   LikeLike

   Reply
8. 

   jnc4p, on November 1, 2012 at 10:38 am said:

   It was proposed months ago. As President Obama noted later in the original interview, it got bogged down in Congressional turf wars.

   LikeLike

   Reply
9. 

   jnc4p, on November 1, 2012 at 10:46 am said:

   Grover Norquist on what’s likely to happen on taxes after the election, regardless of who wins.

   http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/11/01/grover-norquist-even-if-obama-is-reelected-taxes-arent-going-up/

   LikeLike

   Reply
10. 

    Mike, on November 1, 2012 at 1:01 pm said:

    The story that won’t die:

    Former Penn State president Graham B. Spanier was charged Thursday with hushing up child sex abuse complaints against Jerry Sandusky, making him the third school official to be accused of crimes in the alleged cover-up.

    Prosecutors also added counts against the two former underlings, Timothy M. Curley and Gary C. Schultz, who were already charged with lying to the grand jury that investigated the former Penn State assistant football coach.

    Spanier was charged with perjury, obstruction, endangering the welfare of children, failure to properly report suspected abuse and conspiracy. Curley and Schultz face new charges of endangering the welfare of children, obstruction and conspiracy.

    LikeLike

    Reply
11. 

    jnc4p, on November 1, 2012 at 1:52 pm said:

    Worth a read:

    “Hurricane Sandy and the Myth of the Big Government-vs.-Small-Government Debate

    POSTED: November 1, 1:35 PM ET
    Matt Taibbi”

    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/hurricane-sandy-and-the-myth-of-the-big-government-vs-small-government-debate-20121101

    The key point:

    “The point is, we will end up with a big government no matter who wins next week’s election, because neither Mitt Romney nor Barack Obama is supported by a coalition that has any interest in tightening its own belt.”

    LikeLike

    Reply
12. 

    Michigoose, on November 1, 2012 at 2:17 pm said:

    Taibbi is channeling you again, jnc. . . and I think NoVA has said something similar to this, also.

    LikeLike

    Reply
13. 

    Mike, on November 1, 2012 at 2:51 pm said:

    And a not-so-ringing endorsement for Obama from The Economist:

    As a result, this election offers American voters an unedifying choice. Many of The Economist’s readers, especially those who run businesses in America, may well conclude that nothing could be worse than another four years of Mr Obama. We beg to differ. For all his businesslike intentions, Mr Romney has an economic plan that works only if you don’t believe most of what he says. That is not a convincing pitch for a chief executive. And for all his shortcomings, Mr Obama has dragged America’s economy back from the brink of disaster, and has made a decent fist of foreign policy. So this newspaper would stick with the devil it knows, and re-elect him.

    LikeLike

    Reply
14. 

    Michigoose, on November 1, 2012 at 3:13 pm said:

    Mayor Bloomberg is endorsing Obama a little more enthusiastically:

    When I step into the voting booth, I think about the world I want to leave my two daughters, and the values that are required to guide us there. The two parties’ nominees for president offer different visions of where they want to lead America.

    One believes a woman’s right to choose should be protected for future generations; one does not. That difference, given the likelihood of Supreme Court vacancies, weighs heavily on my decision.

    One recognizes marriage equality as consistent with America’s march of freedom; one does not. I want our president to be on the right side of history.

    One sees climate change as an urgent problem that threatens our planet; one does not. I want our president to place scientific evidence and risk management above electoral politics.

    Of course, neither candidate has specified what hard decisions he will make to get our economy back on track while also balancing the budget. But in the end, what matters most isn’t the shape of any particular proposal; it’s the work that must be done to bring members of Congress together to achieve bipartisan solutions.

    Presidents Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan both found success while their parties were out of power in Congress – and President Obama can, too. If he listens to people on both sides of the aisle, and builds the trust of moderates, he can fulfill the hope he inspired four years ago and lead our country toward a better future for my children and yours. And that’s why I will be voting for him.

    Emphasis min.

    But the part of his endorsement that I found most interesting was this:

    If the 1994 or 2003 version of Mitt Romney were running for president, I may well have voted for him because, like so many other independents, I have found the past four years to be, in a word, disappointing.

    That’s got to leave a mark!

    I pulled this off of Bloomberg’s web site.

    LikeLike

    Reply
15. 

    jnc4p, on November 1, 2012 at 3:38 pm said:

    “I want our president to place scientific evidence and risk management above electoral politics.”

    He’s going to be disappointed again.

    On an unrelated note, I don’t see how EJ Dionne can be in favor of abortion rights but at the same time opposed to assisted suicide on moral grounds.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/liberals-should-be-wary-of-assisted-suicide/2012/11/01/81971b10-245e-11e2-9313-3c7f59038d93_blog.html

    LikeLike

    Reply
16. 

    Mike, on November 1, 2012 at 4:10 pm said:

    Trump, trying to stay relevant and failing:

    Obama is a terrible negotiator. He bails out Chrysler and now Chrysler wants to send all Jeep manufacturing to China–and will!

    — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 1, 2012

    @realdonaldtrump you are full of shit!

    — Ralph Gilles (@RalphGilles) November 1, 2012

    Ralph Gilles is Chrysler’s Vice President for Product Design.

    LikeLike

    Reply
17. 

    Michigoose, on November 1, 2012 at 4:26 pm said:

    Subtle

    LikeLike

    Reply
18. 

    Michigoose, on November 1, 2012 at 4:27 pm said:

    jnc:

    I don’t see how EJ Dionne can be in favor of abortion rights but at the same time opposed to assisted suicide on moral grounds.

    I could be wrong, but I think that this is actually fairly common among liberal Catholics. But I don’t really understand where/how to draw that line, either.

    LikeLike

    Reply
19. 

    okiegirl, on November 1, 2012 at 6:25 pm said:

    And this also jumped out at me from the Bloomberg excerpt: I want our president to be on the right side of history.

    Yessss, (Referring to social issues.)

    I don’t see how EJ Dionne can be in favor of abortion rights but at the same time opposed to assisted suicide on moral grounds.

    jnc, just a guess, but what if Dionne holds a view about when “life” actually begins that makes these opinions reconcilable?

    [Good on Gilles]

    LikeLike

    Reply
20. 

    jnc4p, on November 2, 2012 at 8:20 am said:

    If the premise of abortion rights is that the woman should have control of her own body without interference from the state, then it follows that they should also have a right to chose physician assisted suicide if they are competent to make that decision.

    LikeLike

    Reply