Why Obamanomics has failed

In short Obama's undermining of property rights is creating tremendous uncertainty. Ok we know tax increases, government spending and superseding bankruptcy laws on a whim is bad policy but what should he be doing?

The contrast with President Reagan's antirecession and pro-growth measures in 1981 is striking. Reagan reduced marginal and corporate tax rates and slowed the growth of nondefense spending. Recovery began about a year later. After 18 months, the economy grew more than 9% and it continued to expand above trend rates.

Cut spending and taxes is simple concept but tough to implement when your campaign was heavily funded and promoted by the public sector unions. So the substance is unlikely to change but even the rhetoric is wrong.

Second, the administration and Congress have through their deeds and words heightened uncertainty about the economic future. High uncertainty is the enemy of investment and growth.

This uncertainty comes from Obamacare and Cap & Trade.

Mr. Obama has denied the cost burden on business from his health-care program, but business is aware that it is likely to be large. How large? That's part of the uncertainty that employers face if they hire additional labor. The president asks for cap and trade. That's more cost and more uncertainty. Who will be forced to pay? What will it do to costs here compared to foreign producers? We should not expect businesses to invest in new, export-led growth when uncertainty about future costs is so large.

Let's hope after November Obama changes course.

Pajamas Media » Would a Tehran ‘No Fly’ Zone Work?

This is an excellent idea.

A no-fly zone is the legal equivalent of a naval blockade, but it can be used selectively to stop all military flights and all rocket launches. Because all of Iran’s neighbors are now on 15-minute notice against massive missile attacks with an expanding target radius that will soon encompass Europe and the United States, the crucial point is to stop Iran’s missiles from being launched in the first place. If someone is pointing a gun at your heart, make sure they aren’t able to pull the trigger.

The Obama administration has been reluctant to be perceived as meddling in the middle east, the progressive orthodoxy has a knee jerk hostility to the US asserting its interests. But this could be sold as means of supporting the Green Revolution bringing about a new Iran that recognizes it's citizen's human rights and unclenches it's fist in dealing with it's neighbors.

Unions face opposition from long time allies

Even their most ardent supports are coming to realize the present state of public sector unions is not sustainable.

For decades, many state and city politicians, especially Democratic ones, helped assure their re-election by cozying up to public-sector unions and benefiting from their campaign dollars and precinct walkers. Prior to their current jobs

This bitter irony is born out of necessity local & state governments have ran out of money.

"I'm getting branded as an antilabor person by the public employee unions, which amazes me because I've spent my lifetime doing right by working men and women," said Mr. Sweeney, 

Fortunately for Mr. Sweeney the visceral reaction of the unions will be perceived as an asset by the majority of voters in a general election. The trick for these new blue dog Democrates is surviving their primaries. The unions & net roots will ruthlessly be targeting any heretics.

At the local level they can't print money and they have reached the limits of borrowing. So the question becomes what is the union strategy if everyone can see the writings on the wall?  I think the plan is to delay the day of reckoning while pushing for a bail out from the feds, hoping to leverage those campaign contributions in 08.

SANTELLI TO GOVERNMENT: STOP SPENDING! STOP SPENDING! STOP SPENDING! 6-...

Santelli speaks the truth again

Does the Tim Scott, Nikki Haley Revolution signal a big shift nationally?

South Carolina: Outlier or National Precursor?

Interesting article that seems to suggest yes, what is happening in South Carolina does have national implications. Both Tim Scott & Nikki Haley are impressive candidates that have the potential to be stars on the national stage. Even more importantly in terms of November if the voters of a 1 party state that almost habitually resists change like S.C. are feed up its an important barometer of the mood nationally.

Appetite for Profit: All Aboard for Ice Cream: Nestle Peddling Junk Food on Amazon River to Reach Brazil's Slums

Some progressive foodies are incessant about Nestle selling their product in remote areas in the amazon it posted the comment bellow:

"The Swiss company has a team of 7,000 saleswomen who peddle packs of Nestle goods door-to-door in Brazilian slums."

A company makes a investment in a poor rural area, trains a work force providing jobs and innovates a distribution method to deliver the new product and you sanctimoniously declare it an outrage. I guess only food lawyers have the wisdom and insight to know what’s good for the people, they couldn’t possibly make the choice themselves.

The arrogance here is stunning, poverty is preferable to development.

The Founding Father vs. Progressives

Michael Barone underscores the point that property rights are essential to keeping the government from morphing into a kleptocracy.

The whole impetus of the Obama agenda has been to weaken property rights and increase govt redistribution of wealth, the very antithesis of what the founders advocated. Fortunately the American people reject this.

"So when Susan Roesgen, then of CNN, upbraided a tea party protester in 2009 by reminding him that he was getting a $400 tax rebate thanks to the Democrats' stimulus package, she was met with utter dismissal. You don't sell out your property rights for a mere $400."

G20's deaf ear towards Obama

Why aren't the Europeans listening to the US's call to continue "stimulating" the economy through massive deficit spending? The obvious wrong headedness of was never an obstacle in the past, but the difference this time is Greece.

The sovereign debt crises has scared governments so much that they are forced to address the reality. The social democratic model is not sustainable programs & spending must be cut. The big question is will Obama head figure this out before it's too late?

Back Agian

OK its been 4 years & two kids latter. With current administration driving the country off a cliff I've found myself agitated by the news on the daily basis and then I remembered I have a blog!

Starbucks is the new Wal-mart

If the people really do not want a Starbucks in their neighborhood then the store will fail as residents patronize other establishments. But to force out an organization by government fiat is wrong. Even actors should have enough common sense to figure that out.

Going on the domestic offensive

Pejman lays out the case and I could not agree more.

The Bush Administration should seize on the issue of tax reform, draft a package, and push along with Congressional Republicans for approval. In doing so, the Administration and Congressional Republicans will both help their political prospects and can significantly improve the nature of tax policy.

Tax reform has the best chance of being adopted it is easier to understand a simplification of the code, than Social Security reform or how school choice would work to produce a better system. Plus Pejman is correct in pointing out the broad popular support for tax reform does cut into dem leaning voting blocks.

In theory I agree with Mr. Yousefzadeh that a consumption tax would be the optimal choice however politically it would much harder to enact. A move to a Flat tax would also greatly simplify the tax system and reams of data exist as other nations have adopted this model it seems more likely to pass the congress. I only hope the administration has the stamina to push though this reform agenda.

Personnel-wise, the current situation is a sort of perfect storm for the Bush Administration, one that may make it easier to pass a comprehensive tax reform package. The White House Chief of Staff, Josh Bolten, was Director of the Office of Management and Budget prior to taking the Chief of Staff position, and was a Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy before that. The Bush Administration has added a major player to its economic policy team in Hank Paulson, who left a lucrative and influential position as the CEO of Goldman Sachs to become Treasury Secretary. And the Administration now has former Congressman and Trade Representative Rob Portman heading up the Office of Management and Budget.
All three officials are heavyweights, well-versed in economic policy. They also know their way around political obstacles and pitfalls and can deal effectively and credibly with Congress on policy issues. In short, the President has in place a team that is primed to push for the successful enactment of a path-breaking and constructive economic policy package.

Gavin Becker on "Big Box" retailers

Becker has Great post on his blog about an attempt by the Chicago City council last month to impose more restrictions on Wal-Mart. Thankfully mayor Daily vetoed the bill.

To the left commerce is evil

Democratic leaders have found a new rallying cry that many of them say could prove powerful in the midterm elections and into 2008: denouncing Wal-Mart for what they say are substandard wages and health care benefits.

This is absolute insanity the ire this company engenders in people is now being used as a major campaign platform. Just further illustration how devout of serious ideas the left has become. How can any retailer offer comprehensive health care and 15 dollars an hour and stay in business? Why it is always Wall-Mart they target rather then IKEA, Target, and the Gap all retailers with comparable pay and benefits structure, all of which import manufactured goods from China.

Wall-marts sin is that it caters to lower income & rural consumers effectively giving them a raise by increasing their purchasing power. By focusing on these often neglected consumers the company has grown profitable and increased the living standards of those who shop there. The left views that success as heretical only the government is capable of providing this relief not the private sector. This is leading to a growing apostasy among an important voting block, and is forcing even “Moderate” Democrats to denounce Wal-Mart.

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, who was a member of Wal-Mart’s board when she lived in Arkansas, the corporation’s home state, returned a $5,000 campaign contribution from the company last year. Mrs. Clinton said she did so to protest Wal-Mart’s health care benefits, and she has continued to distance herself from the policies of a company she was close to when she was the first lady of Arkansas.

“It’s not anti-business,” said Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana, a former head of the moderate Democratic Leadership Council, appearing at an anti-Wal-Mart rally on Tuesday. “Wal-Mart has become emblematic of the anxiety around the country, and the middle-class squeeze.”

They should think long and hard about the short sightedness of this line of attack. The Dems really need to go back to the drawing board and come up with some sort of governing platform. I am sure executives at the company are scratching their heads at all of this. Don't expect the companies response however true to appease the critics.

Wal-Mart counters that its average wage is more than $10 an hour, and that more than 150,000 Americans who had no health insurance now have it through the company. It also says it has saved consumers billions of dollars by squeezing costs.

How NOT to win friends and influence people

A New Democratic ad for the fall has angered Hispanic groups by comparing illegal immigration to the threats of terrorism and North Korea's expanding nuclear arsenal. Unfortunately the ad was pulled before I could see it but some of the text is in the article. The ad is blatantly false, how is bush responsible for Nuclear technology that the previous administration transferred to Kim Jong Il in an attempt to broker a deal? This type of spin is just not effective anymore.

Reagan's Winds Still at Our Backs

Another excellent article about the continuing impact of the Reagan years. However I don't agree with his take on President Bush.

There has been much disgust on the right at George W. Bush's spending record. But critics should keep in mind that much of that spending was the result of trying to bait Democrats into voting for reforms with long-term benefits. It hasn't worked very well, but it's unfair to see the overall Bush record as a turning back rather than a premature effort to move forward

This excuse might apply to No Child left Behind act or Social Security reform, but certainly not the prescription drug benefit for Medicare. Regardless of the administrations intentions the net result of these programs has been to expand the power and scope of the Federal government. Excluding the tax cuts the Bush years have been devoid of any serious domestic legislation.

Spitzer: Hero or Hack?

Living in the NY, Spitzer is a familiar face; he receives copious amounts of air time on local news outlets. He castes himself as an Eliot Ness-like character crusading against the villains of Wall Street and the media eats it up.

Truth be told, he is a publicity hound and his self righteous blather is devoid of any substance. Unfortunately in New York because he has a (D) before his name he is a virtual lock to the next Governor. Even this pro Spitzer puff piece concedes the point.

Indeed, Spitzer does display an ugly side--a relish of confrontation, a lust for the spotlight--as he gropes his way towards an understanding of the potential and limits of his growing power and visibility. Here and there, Spitzer and his cavalry of legal jousters come across as power-crazed bullies. In one instance, two Spitzer lawyers give an executive 24 hours to plead guilty, threatening if he doesn't to arrest him at home in front of his child and pregnant wife. In another, an exec is sent to jail despite his bond with his severely disabled daughter.

Of course this type of behavior is not just excused but praised because the rich are inherently evil. Imagine the outcry if he was this tough on violent criminals? So what philosophy underlies his prosecutorial zeal and what would his policies as Governor look like?

As Masters points out, Spitzer himself has written that the future of the Democratic Party depends on its ability "to promote government as a supporter of free markets, not simply a check on them," and to hew to "a vision consistent with trust-busting and other progressive market measures first enunciated early in the last century by Theodore Roosevelt." Which is exactly what Spitzer has done.

What does this mean when applied to policy? If government has to "support" free market what is that but the same misguided Keynesian economic model that has animated liberal policy for the last 60 years? What trusts does Spitzer plan to take on? Standard Oil & AT&T are long gone products of the industrial age. In the information age no company no mater how large or profitable is safe from competition unless insulated by government regulations. Case in point witness the struggles of once mighty GM. Further largest most socially damaging monopoly is K-12 education. The government Education bureaucracy is an agrarian age institution that is in desperate need of competition.

Like [Teddy] Roosevelt, Spitzer doesn't see himself as an antagonist of the free market, but rather as its defender against those who would game and corrupt the system. And he is quite explicit about the fact that he sees this not just as good policy, but good politics--particularly for Democrats, and for himself.

The way to insure that no one "game & corrupt the system" is to allow producers not to be hampered by overbearing government regulation that forces them to restrict choice for consumers. Consumers in the market place respond much quicker to events than any legislative or prosecutorial act of government ever could. Spitzer may or may not understand this, but he is right that a significant constituency does exist for his anti growth view point.

The Roaring Naughts!

Brian Wesbury lays out the case for limited government. I wish the current members of congress would read this article and head its lessons to stop spending and expanding government at a torrid pace. Finally he has message for the Fed.

Lastly, strong economic growth does not cause inflation.
Inflation is a monetary phenomenon. Inflation can exist in a strong or weak
economy. However, inflation erodes living standards and undermines the
foundation of the economy. A stable currency is essential to long-term economic
success.

Thankfully Bernanke understands this, and is reining in the excess expansion of the money supply after the 9/11 attacks.

Novak misses the point of the Lamont win

Lieberman's most recent ratings by the American Conservative Union were 7
percent in 2003, zero in 2004 and 8 percent in 2005. "Well deserved!" ACU
Chairman David Keene told me. "I don't see why any conservative should be overly
concerned about Joe Lieberman's plight."

Novak is befuddled by the out pouring of support from the right for Lieberman given his voting record. Speaking as someone who would cross party lines and vote for Senator Lieberman, I can say my support is not based on his posturing as "moderate" Democrat.
Lieberman represented the mythical ideal of politics stopping at waters edge. The idea that we can as Americans have fierce intellectual debates about taxes, abortion, energy policy etc, but be united when it came to issues of national security and defense. That ideal died with Lamont's rambling victory speech.
It is true that a uniform foreign policy consensus has never existed in America. However the lack of civility in the current debate with ludicrous charges being leveled by the extreme left is jarring. The Connecticut primary result is analogous to the ostracizing of the Scope Jackson Dems from the party during the 70's. Lieberman may still win the nutmeg state as an Independent, but the Dems have made clear that their party does not support the war on Islamism.

Castro lives on to terrorize another day

No one can verify if the photo below is really authentic. For the sake of the people of Cuba lets hope its not and he's dead. I do find it humors that Castro is donning a red white and blue adidas track suit.

Supply Side Tax cuts 25 years later

Larry Kudlow lays out the case for the strong American economy and the positive impact of "Reaganomics". The progress of the US economy should be self evident but in these politically charged times even the facts are in dispute. So the good news is worth repeating and few make the case better than Kudlow.