Open Thread (8/20/2008)

Posted August 20th, 2008 at 08:37 AM by IlliniPundit
in

Wednesday, August 20, 2008.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
redstatewannabe's picture
On August 20th, 2008 at 10:29 AM, redstatewannabe said:

Our Gov created a new health-insurance mandate out of thin air with his amendatory veto.  Don't we have a Constitution to stop such things?

This is just another measure that will drive up the cost of group health insurance, pushing more and more employers to consider not offering health insurance at all.  Of course, that would fit nicely into the plans of those who want universal gov't health care.

On August 20th, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Anonymous (not verified) said:

mortgage applications drop 61 per cent since Feb. '08. bad bad bad BAD. Fannie and Freddie continue their slide toward nationalization. national debt will double. spending proposed by candidates are empty promises, particularly universal health care. bond market will hold next pres hostage over these things, as will china. the election is a huge booby prize. there is a huge monster in the closet, starting to rustle under a heap of garbage, thinking about coming out of hibernation. and its name starts with D

Politicalchemy's picture
On August 20th, 2008 at 11:32 AM, Politicalchemy said:

More fuel:

Producer price index -- rising at the highest rate in 27 years
Consumer price index -- rising at the highest rate in 17 years
Housing starts -- steepest drop in 17 years

 

 

 

On August 20th, 2008 at 11:45 AM, logicalpositivist said:

http://www.suntimes.com/news/blogentries/index.html?bbPostId=CzE1tPpV2dnrXCz9GiRQhSnPIQBCgFSY6NR7rKB9mpbnnglMBA&bbParentWidgetId=B8k88rWwXopuz5STgLeVwBLu

Guess even old Emil has his fans (...or apologists...or revisionists).   One of the many chortles in the article:

"Yet Jones is the man who (sic) devoted his life in public service to looking out for the needs of his legislative district. When he moved up to leadership positions that required him to take a look at the bigger picture that is all of Illinois, he still did not forget the South Side neighborhoods where he came from.

JONES SHOWED A certain dignity in the way he conducted himself as a legislative leader."

Too bad it's not Friday--because this article sure is funny!  BTW, can somebody get this Gregory Tejeda an editor?

redstatewannabe's picture
On August 20th, 2008 at 12:47 PM, redstatewannabe said:

anon, PC,

are you saying that the new Pres is doomed to fail?  should the GOP be pulling for Obama so he and his party get pulled down together by the looming crisis?

On August 20th, 2008 at 01:58 PM, Anonymous (not verified) said:

the policies they are now promising are doomed to fail, or, not really ever get off the ground except for some political grandstanding.

yields on government debt will rise (making it more expensive for government to operate).  because those purchasing the debt (treasuries) believe less and less that the governement is capable of paying it back (the debt is going to be huge, especially with the fannie and freddie obligations added).  Especially as more entitlements are added--more borrowing (Obama), or tax cuts are suggested without huge budget cuts (McCain).

This same thing happened to Clinton.  Clinton's entitlement promises went down the tubes because the bond market called BS on him.  He was forced to balance the budget, pay down debt.  It was not politics that killed Hillarycare.  it was the bond market.

These two losers today will be backed into the same corner.  Except to a much, much larger degree.  There will have to be massive, massive cuts in federal spending.  That is an unarguable fact.  tax cuts and universal health care are a pipe dream.  A fantasyland.

Guard your pocket book.  These folks of both spendfree party persuasions are not going to go down without an enourmous fight.

redstatewannabe's picture
On August 20th, 2008 at 02:11 PM, redstatewannabe said:

These two losers today will be backed into the same corner.  Except to a much, much larger degree.  There will have to be massive, massive cuts in federal spending.  That is an unarguable fact.  tax cuts and universal health care are a pipe dream.  A fantasyland.

there will be cuts in fed spending someday, but why in the next 4 years?  pushing funding problems into the future is something gov't is very good at.

Are US Treasuries a bigger risk than alternatives?

John Bambenek's picture
On August 20th, 2008 at 03:00 PM, John Bambenek said:

RSW-

The amedatory veto is a power given to the gov in the constitution and basically empowered him to add in all sorts of little mandates like the health care stunt he just pulled.  It very explicitly gives him legislative power.  If you have a problem with that power (and any right-thinking person should), the constitution needs to be revised to remove that power and other "strong governor" provisions that are a direct result and part of the explicit intent of the 1970 constitution.

--
j
Part-Time Pundit

redstatewannabe's picture
On August 20th, 2008 at 03:13 PM, redstatewannabe said:

John, will it be easier to change the Constitution via convention than otherwise?

Glock21's picture
On August 20th, 2008 at 04:02 PM, Glock21 said:

Redstate had a link to the DNC's VP pages.  Not for Obama, but attacking potential McCain VP's.

 

The weirdest one is Cantor's whose pre-emptive strike focuses oddly about how Jewish he is:

 

Cantor Was Actually Around a Lot of Suspicious Abramoff Events
Cantor Co-Hosted Improper Signatures Fundraiser With Abramoff. Jack Abramoff and House Deputy Republican Whip Eric Cantor co-hosted a fundraiser for then Rep. David Vitter at Abramoff's Signatures restaurant. In April 2005, Vitter admitted to the Federal Elections Commission that he failed to pay for the expenses for the fundraiser. According to the Times Picayune, Rep. Eric Cantor was "the marquee guest" at the event which sought to raise money from the Jewish community. Both Abramoff and Cantor are Jewish. [New Orleans Times Picayune, 4/16/05, NRCC Events List, www.nrcc.org]

All that Corruption Sure Works Up an Appetite
At Fundraiser, Jack Abramoff Named Sandwich After Eric Cantor -- Cantor Asked To Switch Sandwiches. "At a January 2003 fundraiser for Cantor, who had just become chief deputy whip, Abramoff unveiled the Eric Cantor sandwich, 'a tuna-based stacker,' which, lamentably, was 'not quite [the] power lunch befitting' the only Jewish Republican in the House. Hence a request by Cantor ... to switch his eponymous sandwich to roast beef on challah, 'a deli special that exudes Jewish power.'" [The Hill, 1/18/2006]

 

That bit seemed really strange to me.  Did we mention it was for a Jewish community?  Did we mention that both he and Abramoff are Jewish?  He's so Jewish that he likes his sandwiches to be super Jewish!

 

Honestly.  WTF?

 

--

Glock21 Op/Ed

nattering.nabob's picture
On August 20th, 2008 at 04:30 PM, nattering.nabob said:

Producer price index -- rising at the highest rate in 27 years

Consumer price index -- rising at the highest rate in 17 years

Housing starts -- steepest drop in 17 years

Hey, how 'bout those Republican economics. Maybe another four years would be *just what we need*.

redstatewannabe's picture
On August 20th, 2008 at 04:40 PM, redstatewannabe said:

the price indexes are being driven up by ... oil prices. 

Which Republican economic policy exactly is responsible for the rise in oil prices? 

Politicalchemy's picture
On August 20th, 2008 at 04:51 PM, Politicalchemy said:

"the price indexes are being driven up by ... oil prices. "

This is a very good point, even if these increases aren't exclusively attributable to oil prices.  Since these numbers are through June 30, neither do they reflect the recent drop in oil prices.

On August 20th, 2008 at 05:04 PM, Anonymous (not verified) said:

RSW--

it will happen in the next 4 years, because we are in a deflationary spiral, today.

i have heard this idea several times now that the government will always find a way to just endlessly push the financing problems into the future.  The government has lived by the same type financing environment that mortgages, credit cards, auto financing, etc. have gone by in the recent past.  That is, their money supply was wildly inflated, and it was basically easy to get financing.  Now the money supply is shrinking, rapidly.

The government can not endlessly spend away the future.  You know this to be true, and you know it is wrong for them to do it in a reckless fashion, but because the world has continued to work this way for years now we have become numb to the fact and just believe now that nothing will stop it.  That is not really the case and will be made apparent by rapidly approaching events.

short term treasuries finance the day to day operation of the government and provide safety unless you think the government will default on the debt in the near term.  If that happens we are all screwed, and you will be carrying around yuan's, not dollars.  now look at intermediate and long term treasuries.  Up until last year in the whole history of the federal government they have managed to incur a debt of 5 trillion dollars.  In the span of a few months we are going to collapse fan and fred and effectivly increase the debt by the same amount-- to 10 trillion.  great job guys. 

Now if you purchase intermediate and long term treasuries you are starting to get a lot nervous, thinking that maybe it is really possible in the intermediate to long term that the government could default on its debt. Then you see these jokesters running for president, promising things that will absolutely require them to borrow more from the future.  You are now really doubting the ability of the government to repay its debt in the intermediate to long term, or that it is even commited to doing so.  So you start demanding much higher yield for the risk you are going to take.  And it thusly becomes far more expensive for the governemnt to operate.  And so their big expansionist plans get smacked down.  Just like Clinton's did.

Not to mention that the government will get eaten from both ends, one, as tax reciepts drop heavily as a result of recession and deflation of assets, and two, as borrowing becomes more expensive.

Their ability to borrow from the future will become cheaper as they prove that the government better able to repay its debt.  That will happen necessarily by shrinking the size of the federal government and supension of these silly expansionist plans.  This is the ebb and flow.  sometimes it happens gradually.  sometimes it happens abruptly, and violently.

We can continue to say that nothing will change and they will continue to screw it up.  I believe differently, that we are truly at an inflection point and one that will be forced by economic events currently unfolding.  If the inverse is true we are witness to the absolute decline of the united states of america.  it is not mathematically or operationally possible for the federal government to continue on its current trajectory.

at least, this is finally a course of action that centrist america can finally get behind, even if they have to drag dufus McCain or dufus Obama kicking and screaming along.

On August 20th, 2008 at 05:18 PM, Anonymous (not verified) said:

All--

the gov't inflation measures are total BS.  they (intentionally) do not include things like the cost of housing.  why, look at how inflated real estate has gotten over the past ten years.  That is inflation because as it rises it requires that your wages rise to keep up (they haven't--credit just got cheaper).  and if it were figured into the CPi numbers the reported rate of inflation would have been off the charts for the past 6 years.  you have been duped, intentionally.

CPI, while it hurts today, is really yesterday's story.  In the past few weeks one of the largest commodity collapses in history has taken place.  This is a deflationary signal.  Also look at how much the value of your assets have dropped in the past year (house, stocks, etc.).  It is WAY more than the difference in gas price or food price you are paying now.  it is just less obvious.  PAY ATTENTION.  your net worth is being detroyed much more by deflation, not inflation.  this is dangerous.  especially if you are in a lot of debt.

this, IMO, is also not a republican vs. democrat story.  Both parties in congress and the executive have profited from the lobby to encourage reckless lending and reckless securitization of debt.  Both parties have rubber stamped reckless spending.  These days--they are the same dumb entity when it comes to the economy.  They both have screwed it up and have no idea what to do except blame the other side.

redstatewannabe's picture
On August 20th, 2008 at 05:22 PM, redstatewannabe said:

Anon 5:04,

hmmm.....

I'm not sure if I hope you are right, or hope you are wrong.  Pending soc sec and medicare benefits add to that risk/return calc for long-term borrowings too.

McCain talks a good game about controlling pork, but there is more to Fed spending than bridges to nowhere.

If you are right, we should be buying international bonds now, since the "flight to quality" will be out of American, not to it, and drive up the price of these other securities.

This stuff makes my head hurt.

nattering.nabob's picture
On August 20th, 2008 at 05:47 PM, nattering.nabob said:

Which Republican economic policy exactly is responsible for the rise in oil prices?

Every policy that encouraged gasoline usage, discouraged conservation, fought against fuel efficiency standards in automobiles, and underfunded any substantial research into alternative energy sources besides the bad deal called gasahol.

On August 20th, 2008 at 08:06 PM, Anonymous (not verified) said:

Then there was the "cheap oil under someone else's soil" policy that led to a war on mocked-up pretenses. That and a big helping of military industrial complex 100 Years war.

 

FDR might have ended a depression with a similar move, but the only thing Bush did was start a war he knew he'd never be around to finish and likely put us into a depression with his profligate spending and sweatheart contracts with contractor/campaign donors. Congress deserves equal blame for that, since they can seem to offer no alternative.

 

Impeachment may be too late, given the Democrats are still looking for their spine and only finding it in the fellow who is probably the shortest guy on the floor, Dennis Kucinich. But can charges be filed under ordinary criminal law after Bush returns to Texas or Paraguay or where ever? The least real justice could do would be to take away his pension upon conviction, given what a criminal disaster his presidency has been.

nattering.nabob's picture
On August 21st, 2008 at 09:43 AM, nattering.nabob said:

Then add in the Bush economic policies that have pushed down the dollar so dramatically against the euro and other currencies -- the inevitable result of Bush's "we can have our cake and eat it too": the idea that we can simultaneously wage a pointless war whose final cost is likely to reach two trillion -- $2,000,000,000,000 -- while cutting taxes on the rich, ensuring not only that your grandkids are still going to be paying for Bush's wild goose chase in Iraq, but that we're going to pay for it right now, right now at the gas pump, with the lowered value of the dollar as a direct and inevitable consequence of the fact that we're financing the war through massive borrowing, mostly from China.

History isn't going to be very kind to Mr. Bush. The only question is whether or not the mess he's going to leave behind is too big to be cleaned up in the next four years.

On August 21st, 2008 at 10:47 AM, D-Man said:

Assuming that it's the same Anon that's been posting through this thread, first of all, get a name dude.  Feel free to make something up that won't identify you.

Secondly, you state:

...because we are in a deflationary spiral, today.

and

the gov't inflation measures are total BS.  they (intentionally) do not include things like the cost of housing.  why, look at how inflated real estate has gotten over the past ten years.  That is inflation because as it rises it requires that your wages rise to keep up (they haven't--credit just got cheaper).  and if it were figured into the CPi numbers the reported rate of inflation would have been off the charts for the past 6 years.  you have been duped, intentionally.

So, um, would that be that we are in a deflationary spiral, or would we be in a crypto-inflationary spiral?  You do realize that we can't be in both at the same time, right?

Rising prices aren't inflation, they are just rising prices, which are almost always (but not 100% of the time) a symptom of inflation - too much money chasing too few goods and services.  However, I don't think that we could have prices rising as quickly as they have been recently and still be in a deflationary spiral.

Some people, admittedly McCain supporters, have waved off his promises to cut taxes and raise spending, under the assumption that he'll be dealing with a Dem Congress, and that his proposals would be dead on arrival.  His job would be to find the common denominators between him and Congress, or to veto a lot of things that come across his desk.  Obama, on the other hand, will have a more compliant Congress, and so he'll be able to get his also expensive program through more easily.  Those folks are pumping up their guy, but they make a good point - whether one guy or another wins, it's not the same either way, and either will be faced with a very different political situation, if not a different economic situation.

redstatewannabe's picture
On August 21st, 2008 at 11:25 AM, redstatewannabe said:

Every policy that encouraged gasoline usage, discouraged conservation, fought against fuel efficiency standards in automobiles, and underfunded any substantial research into alternative energy sources besides the bad deal called gasahol.

One policy, a high federal gasoline tax, would discourage gasoline usage, encourage conservation, push people 'voluntarily' toward smaller cars (like we are seeing now), and provide a bunch of  funds for research. 

Of course, on the downside, it drives up the price of gasoline, whic make most voters really mad.  Has such bill been passed since the Dems took over Congress?

On August 21st, 2008 at 03:30 PM, pattsi said:

The following was just posted on PLANET (the academic planning listserv) by Peter Dreier "As I note in my piece in today's Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-dreier/jerome-corsis-nonfiction_b_120246.html),   several anti-Obama books have recently arrived in bookstores, and several are already on the best-seller lists. But Jerome Corsi's The Obama Nation has triggered the most controversy." _____"In contrast, Robert Kuttner's new book,  Obama’s Challenge: America’s Economic Crisis and the Power of a Transformative Presidency, is meant to be read, discussed, and debated.  Although Kuttner is a well-known liberal journalist -- the founding editor of the liberal magazine American Prospect and a former columnist for Business Week, who has authored numerous books on politics and economic policy -- Obama's Challenge is not the liberal parallel to Corsi's hate-filled attack. Kuttner's book is not a valentine to Obama, but a serious political analysis of the potential -- and pitfalls -- of an Obama presidency."

Both of these books ought to stimulate hearty discussion on this blog.

Pattsi Petrie