|
Media Infiltrations: Republicans and the Populist Temptation  Wall Street Journal February 9, 2010 Why Taxing Stock Trades Is a Really Bad Idea Wall Street Journal January 6, 2010
"What has been your worst blogging experience? "That's a guy who actually stalks me on the Web and once stalked me personally." "I'm saying this...guy's a jerk."
 The Happy Body Aniela and Jerzy Gregorek What I'm listening to:  Langley Schools Music Project What I'm watching:  Star Trek What I'm playing:  Speed Racer Order these from Amazon.com at Amazon's normal low prices... and a fraction of your order goes to help support this site. Thanks!
Thanks to Irwin Chusid, public editor.
|
Chronicle of the Conspiracy
Join us as we discover, document, expose and challenge the bad people, the bad institutions and the bad ideas that stand in the way of wealth creation -- and show you how to fight back!
Saturday, February 28, 2009
THINK OF IT AN AN INSTRUCTION MANUAL ...on how to shrug.Sales of Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged” have almost tripled over the first seven weeks of this year compared with sales for the same period in 2008. This continues a strong trend after bookstore sales reached an all-time annual high in 2008 of about 200,000 copies sold.Thanks to Dave Duval.“Americans are flocking to buy and read ‘Atlas Shrugged’ because there are uncanny similarities between the plot-line of the book and the events of our day” said Yaron Brook, Executive Director at the Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights. “Americans are rightfully concerned about the economic crisis and government’s increasing intervention and attempts to control the economy. Ayn Rand understood and identified the deeper causes of the crisis we’re facing, and she offered, in ‘Atlas Shrugged,’ a principled and practical solution consistent with American values."
To learn to shrug, too, click here to buy the book!
Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 2:33 PM |
link 
Friday, February 27, 2009
NANCY SHIELD? OR NANCY SPEAR? Our DC-insider friend "Mick Danger" reports from the nation's capital:So Nancy Pelosi is Barack Obama's "shield"?Update... The Politico story that Mick quotes above has the headline, "Pelosi butts heads with Obama." Looking at the accompanying picture, I have to wonder if there was a typo -- and "s" instead of a dash. Shouldn't it be "Pelosi butt-heads with Obama"?Pelosi’s aides say the speaker was comfortable playing the role of Obama’s shield during the stimulus fight—Republicans teed off on her rather than on the immensely popular new president—and that she remains strongly supportive of the administration on health care, energy and education reform.More like a spear than a shield. Let's look a little deeper at Speaker Pelosi.There's something fundamentally dictatorial about her. Hardly the classic profile of a legislator; more like the my-way-or-the-highway attitude of a big city, East Coast ethnic mayor. The kinda pol who dominated for the purpose of buildings bridges, tunnels, airports. AKA real infrastructure. The guy who builds new schools for previously poorly treated minorities. AKA real social and educational improvements.
She's got her daddy's toughness without his purpose. At some point on some issue, her troops will divide and some will stop following her edicts. If President Obama puts himself above and apart from these machinations, he prevails. But, the more he yields to her, he loses traction with a broader coalition in his own party. I suspect Obama is passive-aggressive; why else let her write the Stimulus bill?
This may happen sooner than later. In the budget released yesterday, the proposal to raise over $600 B in a new carbon tax to fund new, radical changes health care must seem like two dreams come true to the dedicated liberals. So athestic, so academic. A thing of beauty, of audacious hope.
In my 31 years of experience, when you mix two controversial issues both of which involve huge changes to complex industries, both fall apart. Or, blow up in your face.
Whatever its relative merits or defects, the President's "budget" exists for the one day it is released. Lives like a fly, buzzes around and dies.
However, once the one-party rule gang turns Obama's first draft into a congressional "budget resolution," it's a different animal. One with multiple lives. If the congressional Democrats use a budget process called "reconciliation" (dontcha love the sweet sound of these terms. Don't we all cry out for "resolution" and "reconciliation"?) the resolution measure only needs 51 votes in the Senate, not 60 (because it cannot be filibustered).
So, let's review. A tightly controlled process produced the highly flawed Stimulus bill (less than 5% of its funding goes to real infrastructure). What little moderation in the bill came from a minor set of changes required to get 60 votes. Nancy was P.O.'d that Harry Reid yielded not to her but to Republican liberals Collins Snowe & Specter. Imagine the blissful day when no compromise is needed!
Back to profiling our lady with the strong arm. Stay tuned. It's S&M + SNL here in ole DC.
Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 9:35 AM |
link
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
TWO-HANDED ECONOMISTS MUST HAVE COME UP WITH THIS PLAN
Thanks to Julian Mann.
Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 12:05 PM |
link
AND THAT CHICKEN (IN EVERY POT) WILL BE CANCER-FREE From the SOTU:
Our recovery plan will...conquer a disease that has touched the life of nearly every American by seeking a cure for cancer in our time.Reader Adam Freund reminds us that in an episode of "The West Wing," the president said, "And so, I announce to you tonight, that I will bring the full resources of the federal government and the full reach of my office to this fundamental goal: we will cure cancer by the end of this decade."
Update... Reader Ray Futrell remind us that Obama's initiative is positively Nixonian. From the Natonal Cancer Institute:
After more than three decades, the "War on Cancer," declared by President Nixon in 1971 with the enactment of the National Cancer Act, is still going on in this country. The Question is: "Are we winning the war?"Unfortunately, there is no simple answer to the question. The good news is that since Nixon's initiative, there have been incredible advances in cancer detection, prevention, and treatment. Since the mid 1990s, the cancer death rate has been decreasing steadily. As one cancer experts puts it: "It's just amazing those that are making it and are living, whereas 10 years ago these same people would not have lived." A diagnosis of cancer once was the virtual equivalent of a death sentence. Today, nearly half of all cancer patients can expect to live for five or more years after the diagnosis of cancer.
However, scientists are still not able to pinpoint a "cause" for cancer.
Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 7:31 AM |
link
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
CORRUPTION TAINTS ANOTHER ONE, HIGHER UP So now it comes out that the family of Vice President Joe Biden is involved with fraudster R. Allen Stanford. From the WSJ:A fund of hedge funds run by two members of Vice President Joe Biden's family was marketed exclusively by companies controlled by Texas financier R. Allen Stanford, who is facing Securities and Exchange Commission accusations of engaging in an $8 billion fraud.So, Mr. Biden and Mr. Biden, what did you know and when did you know it? And how? Are you accustomed to having your fund marketed by people, and accepting money from people, with whom you've never had any communication?The $50 million fund was jointly branded between the Bidens' Paradigm Global Advisors LLC and a Stanford Financial Group entity and was known as the Paradigm Stanford Capital Management Core Alternative Fund. Stanford-related companies marketed the fund to investors and also invested about $2.7 million of their own money in the fund... Paradigm Global Advisors is owned through a holding company by the vice president's son, Hunter, and Joe Biden's brother, James.
...Mr. LoPresti, who represents Hunter and James Biden, as well as Paradigm, said he didn't know which Stanford entity invested the roughly $2.7 million. He said the Bidens never met or communicated with Mr. Stanford.
"There is no connection between the Bidens and Allen Stanford or Stanford period, full stop," he said. "There never was any meeting between any member of the Biden family, no phone calls, zero correspondence."
Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 9:11 AM |
link
DEFLATION? DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT Perry Eidelbus points me to this interview with Paul Krugman, containing his latest fearless prediction:
My big concern here is that the economy digs itself into a deflationary hole, which is what can all too easily happen if you have a large, sustained output gap. Once prices start falling, and people start to expect continuing deflation, the balance sheet problems will become much worse than they already are, and much harder to resolve.Don't worry 'bout deflation, folks. Remember when Krugman predicted an "inflation time bomb"? Yep -- in the early 1980's, just when inflaton was at all time highs and about to decline for three decades. And remember, as Krugman says himself,
Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 12:54 AM |
link
Monday, February 23, 2009
BAIT-AND-SWITCH OF THE DAY This headline on a press release from the Rice University's business school:Breaking news: A positive business storyOh yeah? This is positive? Keep reading...
On Thursday, 20 students from Rice University’s Jones Graduate School of Management will depart to spend their entire spring break in Rwanda for a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to apply their business skills in a developing country."This is a terrific learning opportunity, and it’s unique,” Professor of Management Marc Epstein said. “There's no other program offering this experience to tomorrow's future business leaders.”
Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 12:03 PM |
link
THAT'S MISTER BOURGEOIS, TO YOU! I've been called a lot of names on the web over the years. But this is the first time anyone has ever called me "bourgeois." In fact, this clown calls me "bourgeois, elitist and socialist." Is it possible to be all three at once? Should I care?
Update... Wait, it gets better. Here's another hateblog calling me "A Portrait of Utter Depravity":
Just when you thought you had already seen the absolute worst in mendacity, venality and shameless greed that Modern Times have to offer -well, then along comes Donald Luskin to remind us all that the bottomless depths of Man's fallen nature are known only to God.What's all this hate about? It's a response to my SmartMoney.com column last week, in which I dared to suggest that Chris Dodd's provision in the so-called "stimulus" bill to retroactively limit compensation of bank employees was unfair and inefficient. The Left's capacity to hate never ceases to amaze me.
Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 12:37 AM |
link
VOODOO ECONOMICS IS REDUNDANT Viaour correspondent "Irrational Exuberance," this item from Clusterstock:
There's not much room for common sense and logical thinking in the world of economics. If there were, then too many people would be qualified to discuss it, which would put the high priests -- our pundits and policymakers -- out of business. ...For example, you might think that after a period of excessive debt and spending the answer would be savings and paying down your debt. But what you don't understand is that you're just falling into the paradox of thrift. Good thing we have wise politicians to institute anti-saving policies just when we might fall into that trap.
You might also be surprised that at a time when your income is dwindling, you actually want to see higher prices for goods. Again, a total paradox, right?. Sure, most of the time inflation is called an evil, but god forbid prices might actually go down, and we'd enter a (queue the ominous music) "deflationary spiral." Good thing the government knows to print up more money just as thing seem to be getting more affordable.
...So from now on, don't worry your little head when something doesn't seem to make sense. There are so many paradoxes and multiplier effects, that your feeble-minded "common sense" is rendered useless. Better leave it to the experts.
Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 12:20 AM |
link