Combs Spouts Off

"It's my opinion and it's very true."

  • Calendar

    November 2024
    S M T W T F S
     12
    3456789
    10111213141516
    17181920212223
    24252627282930
  • Recent Posts

  • Tag Cloud

  • Archives

Posts Tagged ‘economy’

Money hole

Posted by Richard on November 16, 2008

Friday night, Jed Baer emailed a few of us about this video at the von Mises Institute, but it wouldn't load for me. Yesterday, LGF posted it. It's damned funny, but in a slightly disturbing way — both the overall idea and the positions of the panel members are just too close to the truth.

It's from the Onion News Network, which Charles Johnson called "one of the last remaining credible mainstream news sources." Enjoy!


In The Know: Should The Government Stop Dumping Money Into A Giant Hole?

UPDATE: OK, the Flash embed here doesn't seem to be working reliably either. Click the link above to view it at the Onion site.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Obama’s coal plan threatens us all

Posted by Richard on November 4, 2008

It's not just residents of coal-producing states like Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, North Dakota, Montana, and Colorado who ought to be concerned about Barack Obama's threat to destroy the coal industry. His radical plan will, by his own admission, cause electricity prices across the country to "skyrocket." Are you ready for that? Is our economy ready?

Investor's Business Daily outlined what's at stake:

Speaking to the San Francisco Chronicle on Jan. 17, Barack Obama singled out new coal plant construction for big taxes. The scheme, part of the cap-and-trade energy policy he wants to implement as president, is meant to tax coal producers straight out of business.

"So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can," Obama said. "It's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted."

Isolated gaffe? No. On his own Web site, Obama declares:

"Once we make dirty energy expensive, the second step in my plan is to invest $150 billion over the next decade to ensure the development and deployment of clean, affordable energy."

In other words, Obama's plan is confiscatory taxes to first destroy America's domestic energy producers, and once that bridge is burned, force the U.S. to rely on alternative energies that haven't been developed. The big-government plan might make ideologues happy, but in the real world, it won't work. …

America is the Saudi Arabia of coal, with the world's largest demonstrated reserve base of 489 billion short tons, the Energy Department says. About 93% of it is used to produce electricity, and it provides about half of U.S. electricity needs. As the nation's economy expands, that need for coal is projected to grow about 20% by 2030.

If that need can't be met, consumers will be hit with high prices brought on by shortages. Meanwhile, America's 80,000 miners and 1.6 million workers in coal-related and coal-dependent industries would suffer from Obama's taxes on new plants.

"Under my plan of a cap and trade system," Obama said in another interview, "electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket." He added that because "I'm capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, you know, natural gas, you name it — whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to the consumers."

The biggest problem with Obama's plan is that it taxes productive companies, and offers nothing but "hope" to replace the missing energy. He does not propose using our current resources as a bridge to cleaner energy. He'd rather stop their use cold. No nuclear power, no offshore drilling, no new coal plants, and if consumers have to pay more, too bad. Obama's attack on coal use surely will leave us poorer.

And that's only one of the hundreds of Obama plans to "fundamentally transform" this country that will make us all poorer. He's not going to redistribute wealth so much as he's going to redistribute misery. There will be lots more of that for everyone.

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

Envisioning the worst-case future

Posted by Richard on October 15, 2008

In his latest Weekly Standard column, Fred Barnes foresaw a bleak future for advocates of liberty and limited government (as if it isn't bleak enough, with half the nation's Republicans embracing Keynesian economic policies):

Thanks particularly to the month-long financial crisis, Republicans are in extremely poor shape with the election three weeks away. This means the worst case scenario is now a distinct possibility: a Democrat in the White House, a Democratic Senate with a filibuster-proof majority, and a Democratic House with a bolstered majority.

If this scenario unfolds, Washington would become a solidly liberal town again for the first time in decades. And the prospects of passing the liberal agenda–nearly all of it–would be bright. Enacting major parts of it would be even brighter. You can forget about bipartisanship.

The specifics are grim: big tax rate increases, liberal court appointments, protectionism, the fairness doctrine, Canada-like health care, card-check and other pro-union measures, cap-and-trade… Read the whole thing. 

Stephen Green, after an admittedly large intake of wine, envisioned new threats to free speech and in particular to bloggers:

If (when?) Obama is elected, by my estimation there’s an at least even chance that the newly-reconstructed FCC will reverse course and attempt to apply the New Fairness Doctrine to blogs.

If (when?) it happens, I’ll break that law. I will break it with all due malice and in full knowledge of the possible consequences. I’ll shout “Fire Obama!” in a crowded theater. And then, for the first time ever, I’ll ask for reader donations. Because I’ll going to need them, lots of them, to pay for the lawyers.

Green went on to make a point that dovetails with something I've maintained for some time — the left views its opponents as evil enemies to be crushed by any means necessary, and they're willing and eager to use any means necessary. The libertarian/conservative side simply can't and won't fight on that level: 

Libertarians/Conservatives like “Jay” and myself underestimate liberals/progressives — and what we’re guilty of is projection. But when we’re drunk and honest, we have to admit: We’re effing pikers. To restate more plainly: We don’t want power, and don’t know how to wield it. We’re pikers.

Progressives have no such qualms. Given power, they’ll take more and they’ll exercise it ruthlessly. Look at the Democrats in Congress these last two years. In not even 24 months, they’ve sunk to depths it took the Republican Congress six or more years to sink to. Their unpopularity levels are even worse than the Republicans’ in 2006. And what will happen in November? The Democrats will win seats — because they know how to wield their power to deliver the goods to please their corrupt, greedy, grabby, needy base.

I hope Barnes and Green are too pessimistic, but it's not looking good. 

Green was concerned enough to blast email his many influential contacts (and me, too) with "My First-Ever Mass Mailing In Almost Eight Years of Blogging," which may lead to some kind of organization or movement, or something. Maybe not right now, but probably — if the polls turn out to be right this time. 

Stay tuned. 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

House can’t handle flood of emails

Posted by Richard on September 30, 2008

According to The Hill:

The House is limiting e-mails from the public to prevent its websites from crashing due to the enormous amount of mail being submitted on the financial bailout bill. 

As a result, some constituents may get a 'try back at a later time' response if they use the House website to e-mail their lawmakers about the bill defeated in the House on Monday in a 205-228 vote.

… 

The CAO issued a “Dear Colleague” letter Tuesday morning informing offices that it had placed a limit on the number of e-mails sent via the “Write Your Representative” function of the House website. It said the limit would be imposed during peak e-mail traffic hours.

“This measure has become temporarily necessary to ensure that Congressional websites are not completely disabled by the millions of e-mails flowing into the system,” the letter reads.

A flood of millions of emails, almost all against the Paulson bailout plan, goes a long way toward explaining why the Democrats played to lose yesterday's bailout plan vote:

"Clyburn was not whipping the votes you would have expected him to, in part because he was uncomfortable doing it, in part because we didn't want the push for votes to be successful," says one leadership aide. "All we needed was enough to potentially get us over the finish line, but we wanted the Republicans to be the ones to do it. This was not going to be a Democrat-passed bill if the Speaker had anything to say about it."

During the floor vote, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and House Democrat Conference chair Rahm Emanuel could be seen monitoring the vote on the floor, and gauging whether or not more Democrat votes were needed. Clyburn had expressed concerns, says the leadership aide, of being asked to press members of the Black and Hispanic caucuses on a bill he was certain those constituencies would not want passed.

"It worked out, because we didn't have a dog in this fight. We negotiated. We gave the White House a bill. It was up to the Republicans to get the 100 plus votes they needed and they couldn't do it," said another Democrat leadership aide.

Emanuel, who served as a board member for Freddie Mac, one of the agencies that precipitated the economic crisis the nation now finds itself in, had no misgivings about taking a leadership role in tanking the bill. "He was cheerleading us along, mothering the votes," says the aide. "We wanted enough to put the pressure on the Republicans and Congressman Emanuel was charged with making it close enough. He did a great job."

The Democrats weren't about to take the lead in passing this hugely unpopular bill. They knew they could count on their allies in the media to make the Republicans look bad no matter what happened, as long as the vote was close. So they did their best to assume the role of disinterested bystanders. And judging by today's news coverage, they're mostly getting away with it.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 2 Comments »

Roots of mortgage crisis

Posted by Richard on September 30, 2008

Ralph Reiland wrote a nice, succinct history of how we got into the current mess. The roots of the current crisis go back to Jimmy Carter's 1977 Community Reinvestment Act, which gave poor people and minorities greater access to mortgage credit by punishing lending institutions that didn't meet "equal credit" guidelines.

In 1995, the Clinton administration greatly accelerated the flood of easy home loans by expanding both the carrots and the sticks.

One of the biggest sticks in the 1995 Treasury regulations involved letting left-wing advocacy groups essentially extort large pools of mortgage money from banks (along with hefty fees for the advocacy groups) in exchange for a satisfactory CRA rating.

The most successful of these radical left-wing groups was ACORN, today better known for its widespread voter registration frauds that have led to indictments in more than a dozen states. In the 90s, ACORN made a vast fortune extorting mountains of mortgage money from banks and parceling it out in the poor and minority communities over which it exercised influence (emphasis added): 

In addition to setting the stage for giving money for mortgage payouts to ACORN and other lending amateurs, CRA authorized those organizations to collect fees from the banks for their "marketing" of loans.

"The Senate Banking Committee has estimated that, as a result of CRA, $9.5 billion so far has gone to pay for services and salaries of the nonprofit groups involved," reported Husock.

There's big money, in short, in "nonprofit" activism — and upward mobility. A guy carries a sign advocating "Change" in front of a bank and the government turns him into a salaried protester, credit analyst and dispenser of mortgage money.

"The changes came as radical 'housing rights' groups led by ACORN lobbied for such loans," reports Investor's Business Daily, regarding the Clinton era. "ACORN at the time was represented by a young public-interest lawyer in Chicago by the name of Barack Obama."

Change you can bank on.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 4 Comments »

Bipartisan opposition killed bailout bill

Posted by Richard on September 30, 2008

The Paulson power grab, a.k.a. the $700 billion bailout bill, was defeated in the House today, 205-228. Both sides are blaming partisanship and pointing fingers. But when I look at the voting breakdown — 95 Democrats and 133 Republicans voted Nay — I see a pretty bipartisan rejection of this ugly monstrosity.

As for the man behind the massive bailout, Hank Paulson, he's nominally a Republican, but his plan appeals to Eastern country-club Republicans and establishment liberal Democrats — the big-government types who have cozy symbiotic relationships with the big-finance types on Wall Street.

In fact, Paulson has been more in tune with liberal Democrats than Republicans, and that's not a new development. About a year ago, Bob Novak pointed out that Paulson had put two strong Democrats — former associates from Goldman Sachs — into important positions at Treasury. Novak also noted that Paulson himself, although a big Bush fundraiser in 2004, had also contributed to Clinton, Schumer, Bill Bradley's presidential campaign, and the very liberal Emily's List. 

Michelle Malkin collected some statements from Paulson over the last 18 months regarding the subprime mortgage mess. They don't reflect well on his financial acumen and judgment.

Paulson isn't the only person who's been denying that there was any problem with subprime mortgages. Democrats have successfully fought off repeated efforts to reform and regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac since 2001. Here's a 3½-minute special report from Fox News summarizing the 8-year history of ignored warnings and failed efforts to stop the impending crisis. 

 

Here's an 8½-minute compilation of C-SPAN clips from a 2004 hearing into Fanny and Freddie. The regulator warns of the inevitable collapse, while Democrats denounce the critics, defend the agencies, and insist there's nothing wrong. Near the end, Franklin Raynes himself insists that Fannie's subprime mortgages have "zero risk."

 

Sen. McCain warned in 2006 about the "enormous risk" that Fannie and Freddie posed to the economy, but Democrats blocked his reform and oversight bill.

 

Plenty of people in both major parties benefited from Fannie and Freddie's house of cards. But virtually all the people enriching themselves on the inside were Democrats (Raines, Johnson, Gorelick, Mudd). And the majority of the politicians raking in big contributions and using the easy credit scam to further their political careers were Democrats (Dodd, Kerry, Obama, Clinton).

It's more than a bit unseemly for Sen. Obama (who took $105,000 from Fannie and Freddie in just 2 years) to blame the mess on the "failed Bush policies."

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Gramm tells truth, McCain denounces him

Posted by Richard on July 10, 2008

Former Sen. Phil Gramm, McCain's top economic advisor, has more understanding of economics in his little finger than John McCain and Barack Obama have in both their gigantic egos combined. Yesterday, Gramm provided some much-needed perspective on the state of the economy and people's attitudes about it:

"You've heard of mental depression; this is a mental recession," he said, noting that growth has held up at about 1 percent despite all the publicity over losing jobs to India, China, illegal immigration, housing and credit problems and record oil prices. "We may have a recession; we haven't had one yet."

"We have sort of become a nation of whiners," he said. "You just hear this constant whining, complaining about a loss of competitiveness, America in decline" despite a major export boom that is the primary reason that growth continues in the economy, he said.

"We've never been more dominant; we've never had more natural advantages than we have today," he said. "We have benefited greatly" from the globalization of the economy in the last 30 years.

Mr. Gramm said the constant drubbing of the media on the economy's problems is one reason people have lost confidence. Various surveys show that consumer confidence has fallen precipitously this year to the lowest levels in two to three decades, with most analysts attributing that to record high gasoline prices over $4 a gallon and big drops in the value of homes, which are consumers' biggest assets.

"Misery sells newspapers," Mr. Gramm said. "Thank God the economy is not as bad as you read in the newspaper every day."

Gramm went on to sketch out the McCain economic plan (Gramm undoubtedly had a major hand in crafting it), which has some pretty good stuff in it:

Mr. McCain's economic program will seek to enliven growth by enabling taxpayers to opt into a new, simplified tax system with two low rates of 10 percent and 25 percent and no itemized deductions, he said.

Mr. McCain would tackle intransigent budget deficits by wrestling down burgeoning benefits programs and aggressively attacking wasteful spending whether it's in the Pentagon's procurement and weapons budget or congressional pork-barrel bills, he said.

Mr. Gramm said a bipartisan deal might include raising the retirement age to 70 over 30 years, indexing the benefits of wealthier retirees to inflation rather than the more generous wage rate, and creating a private account program for younger workers.

Mr. McCain, a Republican with a proven record of voting for spending cuts, will renew efforts to balance the budget through spending reforms, he said. "It will be popular with the public but hated in Washington."

Mr. McCain also will pursue immigration reforms that would start with effective border enforcement but include a possible doubling of legal immigration, including no limits on scientific and technical workers and a generous sized guest worker program, he said.

Barack Obama quickly ridiculed Gramm's remarks, defended the whiners, rejected the McCain economic plan, and embraced the failed policies of the past:

“It isn’t whining to ask government to step in and give families some relief.”

So, McCain recognized this as a great opportunity to separate himself from the bitterness, resentment, and pessimism that have become the trademark of the left and to embrace the optimism and "can-do" attitude that naturally appeals to most Americans — right?

Umm, no. He scrambled to ally himself with the whiners and distance himself from Gramm:

Minutes later McCain disavowed the Gramm comments, saying, “We are experiencing enormous economic challenges as well as others. Phil Gramm does not speak for me. I speak for me. So I strongly disagree.”

Asked if Gramm might be in line for a job as treasury secretary, McCain joked: “I think Senator Gramm would be in serious consideration for ambassador to Belarus, although I am not sure that the citizens of Minsk would welcome that.”

I'm not amused. McCain is behaving like Obama would after Jesse Jackson had his way with him. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

More good news than bad

Posted by Richard on July 7, 2008

The mainstream media have been relentlessly negative about America's economy (and life here in general) for the past five years. Now that there really are some problems, it's gotten worse. And I predict they'll become even more obsessed with doom and gloom as the election gets closer.

Case in point: Saturday's AP story, "America's unhappy birthday." I won't excerpt it or link to it, since they threaten to come after bloggers who quote them without paying a fee. But you may have seen it in your local paper or on one of the news aggregator sites. Doug Ross has excerpts here (I assume he's defying them, not paying up). The gist is that life in America sucks, almost everyone's miserable, and people are hoping someone will "ride to their rescue" (you can quote up to four words free, according to the AP fee schedule).

Well, cheer up! Sure, we've hit a bit of a rough patch recently, with the gas and food price increases and the mortgage mess (all of which are a consequence of liberal feel-good policies out of Washington). But so far, this century's really looking pretty good. Last Thursday, Mark J. Perry posted some evidence from Investor's Business Daily, leading off with another great graph (Perry does terrific charts and graphs) illustrating how much richer we've become:

U.S. Household Net Worth, 1980 to 2008

 

Americans' net worth — what they owned less what they owed — was $55.97 trillion. That's down from the peak of $58.196 trillion in the third quarter of 2007, but still $15.3 trillion above where it was seven years ago (see chart above).

Put another way, a bit more than one-quarter of all the wealth created in America in the 232 years since our founding was created in the last seven years.

I blame Bush.

There's more good news regarding incomes, jobs, the poor, lifespans… Read the whole thing.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »