Tuesday, October 4, 2011

The Shifty Bernanke

Here's a report from WSJ on Fed chairman Bernanke's testimony today before Congress’s Joint Economic Committee:

Rep. Michael Burgess (R., Texas) is getting antsy with the lack of definitive answers that support his views. Is the printing press the only tool left for you? he asks.

Bernanke isn't giving him what he wants: "The basic tool that the Federal Reserve has is operations in the open market that may or may not increase the money supply." The Fed does have tools, he says. "Obviously we want to evaluate the costs and the benefits of any decisions." Upon more printing-press comments from Burgess, Bernanke fights back: "The printing press literally is not actually involved," he says, noting that the latest bond-swap program doesn't include a significant increase in the Fed's balance sheet.
Got that? He has everyone focused on Operation Twist, which he himself wrote in 2004 doesn't work, so he can claim the printing press is not involved. But, put aside Operation Twist and Bernanke is printing like a mad man. As the Fed's own data shows, through the end of August, 13-week annulaized money growth (M2) is at 23.3%.

Bernanke is has potential has a three card monte shark, if the Fed is ended.

Christie Will Not Run

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie plans to announce Tuesday that he will not run for the White House, according to reports.

Obama's Creeping Interventionism

Bank of America announced last week that it will charge its debit card users a $5 monthly fee beginning in early 2012, other banks have followed with similar announcements.

The bank implemented the fee as a result of the Durbin Amendment, a provision of the Dodd-Frank financial reform law that set limits on the fees banks could charge retailers for swiping their debit cards.

President Obama signed the legislation, which also created, Elizabeth Warren's Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Now, the President is blasting banks for instituting the fee, which was caused by the legislation he signed, and is signaling he wants more micromanagement of the banking sector:


This is exactly why we need this Consumer Finance Protection Bureau that we set up that is ready to go. This is exactly why we need somebody who's sole job it is to prevent this kind of stuff from happening. ... You can stop it because if you say to the banks, ‘You don't have some inherent right just to – you know, get a certain amount of profit. If your customers – are being mistreated. That you have to treat them fairly and transparently.
Got that? Regulation has resulted in the $5.00 fee, now Obama wants even more micromanagement and regulation in response to the initial regulation.

Creeping intervetionism before our eyes.

The Police and the Protesters are on the Same Side

By Anthony Gregory

The "Occupy Wall Street" movement is spreading. Protests have appeared in Los Angeles and Washington, DC. The drama has become palpable, featuring a march on LA's city hall, confrontations with police, and mass arrests.

In light of such a spectacle, those who highly value the role of ideas in social change are tempted to root for one side or the other. They wish to see their own ideology reflected in prominent people and institutions, and in any clash it is tempting to seek a hero. It is no fun to be neutral when history is being made.

Some who see the protesters as a bunch of whiny young leftists opposing the great symbols of American capitalism will be tempted circumstantially to side with Wall Street. Yet much of the anger against Wall Street is justified if misdirected, even reflecting a vaguely classical-liberal class consciousness. In cahoots with the politicians, these giant firms are indeed ripping off the middle class and poorer Americans. Today's political economy resembles some form of fascism more than the free-enterprise system, and of the businesses with a hand in colluding with the state in advancement of corporatism, those being targeted by the protesters for special animus are probably among the guiltiest. Some of the activists, waving signs in opposition to bailouts, war, and police abuses, are carrying a libertarian message.

But overall the protesters' message is too vague and heterogeneous — at best — to elicit much enthusiasm. As in the tea parties to which it has been compared, many in this movement are condemning a nebulous conception of the status quo without much of an inspiring alternative vision.

It gets worse. Although there is no single ideology uniting the movement, it does seem to have a general philosophical thrust, and not a very good one at that. OccupyWallStreet.org has a list of demands, and while the website does not represent all of the protesters, one could safely bet that it lines up with the views of most of them: A "living-wage" guarantee for workers and the unemployed, universal healthcare, free college for everyone, a ban on fossil fuels, a trillion dollars in new infrastructure, another trillion in "ecological restoration," racial and gender "rights," election reform, universal debt forgiveness, a ban on credit reporting agencies, and more power for the unions. Out of over a dozen demands there is only one I agree with — open borders — and, ironically, many on Wall Street probably favor that as well.

All in all, this wish list is a terrible recipe for moving far down the road toward socialism. On the way to achieving these goals, totalitarian controls on the population would be necessary. Some of these demands are merely horrible ideas that would injure the economy severely — such as the huge expansion of public infrastructure. But others are so fancifully utopian — such as a living wage guaranteed to all, especially when combined with free immigration — that their attempted implementation would confront the many disasters and horrors we have seen in every nation that has seriously attempted socialism. Such policies would vastly expand the government, including its manifestations in the corporate state and police power that these protesters find so unsavory. All of the corruption and brutality they think they oppose are symptoms of the same essential political ideology they favor.

Indeed, the true members of the ruling class have nothing to fear from these protests, which on balance strengthen the power elite, whether the activists get their demands or not. This is because they do not have a coherent program for true liberty. The same principle behind freely living where and how you please and voicing one's opinions without harassment from the government underlies the freedom to engage in short selling, hostile takeovers, mergers, and speculation. Just as important, these protesters fail to understand that the market economy that they want the state to conquer is the principal engine of prosperity.

Read the rest here.

Chris Christie Decision Announcement Coming

Chris Christie will hold a press conference at 1pm to announce his decision whether or not he will run for President in 2012.

Is War with Pakistan Next?

By Eric Margolis

The US is now risking a military confrontation with old ally Pakistan that is both highly dangerous and unpredictable in the extreme.

It’s awfully hard for the world’s greatest power to admit its high-tech military forces are being beaten in Afghanistan by a bunch of lightly-armed mountain tribesmen that we dismiss as "terrorists."

But that’s what’s happening in the "Graveyard of Empires." Washington can’t and won’t admit it has blundered into a bloody, trillion dollar fiasco in Afghanistan.

Right now, Pakistan is the chief whipping boy for US imperial fury.

Last week, outgoing US chief of staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, accused Pakistan’s intelligence agency, ISI, of being behind recent high profile attacks against US targets in Afghanistan that were allegedly staged by the Haqqani network, one of Taliban’s coalition members fighting foreign occupation. A recent assault by Taliban mujahidin on the US Embassy in Kabul revived very bad dreams of the Viet Cong’s war-winning 1968 Tet Offensive.

Admiral Mullen accused the Haqqani network of being "a virtual arm" of ISI. Pakistan strongly denied US charges. In fact, both CIA and Pakistan’s intelligence agency, ISI, have long maintained covert links with the Haqqani group.

Much of CIA’s intelligence on Afghanistan comes from two sources: electronic intercepts, and the Afghan government’s intelligence service.

Most anti-US fighters are far too experienced to use electronic communications they know are easily picked up by US satellites, aircraft, drones, airships, and ground stations.

The Afghan government intelligence service is dominated by Tajik Communists from the old Soviet-created KHAD intelligence agency who are blood enemies of Pakistan and Afghanistan’s Pashtun majority.

Afghan spooks have become a primary source of disinformation to US military and civilian intelligence outfits, and likely the source of claims that Pakistan’s ISI was behind recent attacks on US targets in Afghanistan. US intelligence was similarly misled in 2003 over Iraq by a "friendly," self-serving intelligence service.

Official Washington is reacting with free-form rage rather than careful thought. No doubt, the example of the Soviet 1989 defeat in Afghanistan increasingly haunts Washington.

Read the rest here.

Geithner to Update His Real Bosses, the Power Elite

On Tuesday morning, Treasury Secretary Geithner will conduct meetings at Treasury.

In the afternoon, the Secretary will travel to New York.

In the evening, Secretary Geithner will attend the Council on Foreign Relations' annual dinner where he will participate in a moderated discussion on the global economy with CFR President Richard Haass.

Monday, October 3, 2011

HOT Ron Paul: Impeachment of Obama Possible

Ron Paul said Monday that President Barack Obama’s targeted killing of the American,Anwar al-Awlaki, might be an impeachable offense, Politico reports.

Asked at a Manchester, N.H. town hall meeting about last week’s killing, Dr. Paul said impeachment would be “possible,” but that he wants to know more about how the administration “flouted the law.”

Paul called the killing a movement toward “tyranny.”

“I put responsibility on the president because this is obviously a step in the wrong direction,” Paul said. “We have just totally disrespected the Constitution.”

The Totally Confused Peter Thiel: Live in DC

Peter Thiel is co-founder PayPal and an early investor in Facebook. He is ranked #365 on the Forbes 400 list (2010).

The Manhattan Institute and e21 hosted a conversation with Thiel at the National Press Club in Washington DC. Although considered by some to be a libertarian, his views often ranged far from Liberty Nation. At times, he sounded like Tyler Cowen with more facts.

He predicted a return of Malthusianism. He thinks, like Malthus, that we are running out of food and other resources. He said that energy started going wrong in the 1970s. And he said that food yields have barely kept pace with global population growth in the last 30 years. [Which means they have kept pace-RW]

Here's Murray Rothbard on Malthus and his equations:

...a third element explained his instant renown: the spurious air of the "scientific" that his alleged ratios gave to a doctrine in an age that was increasingly looking for models of human behavior and its study in mathematics and the "hard" physical sciences.

For spurious Malthus's ratios undoubtedly were. There was no proof whatever for either of these alleged ratios. The absurdly mechanistic view that people, unchecked, would breed like fruit flies cannot be demonstrated by simply spelling out the implications of the alleged "doubling itself every twenty-five years."...

In a few more centuries, at the same rate, the "ratio" of population to subsistence would begin to approach infinity. This is scarcely demonstrable in any sense, certainly not by referring to the actual history of human population that, in most of Europe, remained more or less constant for centuries before the Industrial Revolution.

Still less is there proof of Malthus's proclaimed "arithmetical ratio," where he simply assumes that the supply of food will increase by the same amount for decade after decade...

Then, by the 1960s and 1970s, antipopulation hysteria arose again, with ever more strident calls for voluntary or even compulsory zero population growth, and countries such as India and China experimented with compulsory sterilization or compulsory abortion. Characteristically, the height of the hysteria, in the early 1970s, came after the 1970 census in the United States noted a significant decrease in the birth rate and the beginnings of an approach toward a stationary state of population. It was also observed that various third-world countries were beginning to see a marked slowing of the birth rate, a few decades after the fall in death rate due to the infusion of Western advances in medicine and sanitation. It looked again as if people's habituation to higher living standards will lead them to lower the birth rate after a generation of enjoying the fruits of lower death rates. Population levels will, indeed, tend to adapt to maintain cherished standards of living.It looks as if Godwin was right that given freedom, individuals in society and the marketplace will tend to make the correct birth decisions..



Thiel went on to say that travel got faster every decade from the 1500s onward, but that stopped in the 70s [But he ignored the fact that more people fly at the fastest rates now than ever before]

He said that what's happening in the middle east is technological failure that has produced "desperate people more hungry than scared" [which means he completely ignores the role that totalitarian governments play in suffocating a country]

He said regulatory inertia has come to dominate because no one believes the future will be better. [I have no idea where he gets this, everyday there are more and more regulations. Has he heard of the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau? Has he heard that bank fees are going up because of new regulations? Has he heard of Obamacare?)

Then he said of the woman who forcibly takes money from the German people and gives it to the Greeks so that they can give it to the banksters that she, Angela Merkel, is the leading conservative leader in the world today. [Pardon me while I puke.]

Paging Hayek! Thiel then actually said that scientists and engineers are extremely underrepresented in the political culture. Theil obviously doesn't get that it is not the planners, but the fact that society can not be planned, that is the problem with government planning. No one knows what some lone scientist is dreaming up that will change the world. No one knows what some entrepreneur has spotted that will be in demand across the globe, once he brings it to our attention. It is absolutely insane to think that a central planner, even a scientist or engineer, can know what the entire world is thinking, big and small, and thus plan out the entire world.

Then, incredibly, Thiel said, he would prefer small government, but if it's going to be big we should at least have a plan for what we're doing instead of chaos. [Chaos is the only thing that will save us from a big government, which by definition will be totalitarian]

Bottom line: Thiel, like Cowen, seems to have no problem taking one side of a position and then, minutes later, taking the opposite,e.g. although favorably bringing up Malthus at one point, at another point, he disses Malthus.

But even more seriously, he seems to fail to get the the big picture fact that central planning can not work, even if "scientists and engineers" are brought in, since as Hayek and Ludwig von Mises taught us, knowledge is dispersed through out the population and it is impossible for one planner to ever have all the information.

Thiel, thus, is another example of a billionaire, who doesn't understand how the economy works. For the same reason that we would never have Michael Jordan perform heart surgery on us, despite the fact that he was a great athlete, with great stamina, we should stop listening to billionaires about how to run the economy. Thiel proved today that making a billion is certainly a different skill than understanding how the economy that he made his billions in works.

What if the NFL Played by Teachers' Rules?

Fran Tarkenton (Former NY Giants and Minnesota Vikings quaterback)writes in today's WSJ:
Imagine the National Football League in an alternate reality. Each player's salary is based on how long he's been in the league. It's about tenure, not talent. The same scale is used for every player, no matter whether he's an All-Pro quarterback or the last man on the roster. For every year a player's been in this NFL, he gets a bump in pay. The only difference between Tom Brady and the worst player in the league is a few years of step increases. And if a player makes it through his third season, he can never be cut from the roster until he chooses to retire, except in the most extreme cases of misconduct.

Let's face the truth about this alternate reality: The on-field product would steadily decline. Why bother playing harder or better and risk getting hurt?

No matter how much money was poured into the league, it wouldn't get better. In fact, in many ways the disincentive to play harder or to try to stand out would be even stronger with more money.

Of course, a few wild-eyed reformers might suggest the whole system was broken and needed revamping to reward better results, but the players union would refuse to budge and then demonize the reform advocates: "They hate football. They hate the players. They hate the fans." The only thing that might get done would be building bigger, more expensive stadiums and installing more state-of-the-art technology. But that just wouldn't help.

If you haven't figured it out yet, the NFL in this alternate reality is the real -life American public education system. Teachers' salaries have no relation to whether teachers are actually good at their job—excellence isn't rewarded, and neither is extra effort. Pay is almost solely determined by how many years they've been teaching. That's it. After a teacher earns tenure, which is often essentially automatic, firing him or her becomes almost impossible, no matter how bad the performance might be. And if you criticize the system, you're demonized for hating teachers and not believing in our nation's children.


Tarkenton gets the above right, but then blames the problem on teacher unions, when the problem is really government involvement in the education system. He writes:
Our rigid, top-down, union-dictated system isn't working. If results are the objective, then we need to loosen the reins, giving teachers the ability to fulfill their responsibilities to students to the best of their abilities, not to the letter of the union contract and federal standards.
A union systen such as we have with governmnet involved in education wouldn't be able to survive in the private sector, any more so than such a government involved NFL would.

The answer is to get government out of the education business so it can grow and thrive, just like the NFL. In other words, Are you ready for some education?

On Typos

It happens at the great NYT, by even the great Keynesian interventionist Paul Krugman:


The Senate will be taking up Chinese currency this coming week. So I though [sic]I should offer a brief note about one of the arguments people make against focusing on Chinese currency manipulation...


So lay off EPJ.

Best Explanation of the Latest "Solution' to the EuroZone Crisis

From Wolfgang Munchau, on the latest euro rescue idea (using the existing stabilization fund, but leveraging it up like a collateralized debt obligation):


This is the equivalent of putting explosives into a can, before kicking it down the road.

(htPaulKrugman)

Pilots Bailing Out of AMR

More than 200 pilots have retired from American Airlines in the last two months, compared with a typical monthly dozen, according to MarketWatch.

Pilots who retired last week were able to cash in company stock at its Aug. 1 price, which was 28% above Friday's closing price.

Shares in AMR, parent of American Airlines, are down today by another 18% to $2.42, on rumors that the firm will file a pre-packaged bankruptcy.

'Occupy Wall Street' Protesters in Colorado Get It

Says an EPJ reader from Colorado:

Thought you might enjoy hearing about how out here in Denver we try to protest with an informed perspective:

(We talked about the FED!)

Occupy Protests in Colorado occurred yesterday infront of the local branch of the Federal Reserve System! While on a bike ride with my Dad, we were making our way through downtown and came across the Colorado gathering of the Occupy protests, but contrary to much of the uninformed demands some are making in New York, these Colorado activists were talking about the FED! Here's some great examples of what I heard/saw from the truly diverse group of 50 activists gathered:

1) Entire group loudly chanting of "END THE FED!"

2) After that chant I addressed the crowd by discussing the links between the Fed and the TBTF banks that many expressed anger at, I mentioned that the banks wouldn't be nearly as big as they are if not for the printing press, rent seeking on American taxpayers, false urgency for bailouts etc.

3) Next, for about 10 minutes, a man stood up to talk about the specifics of inflation and the hidden inflation tax we get in the grocery store, debasement of the currency, the 1913 Federal Reserve Act, the Jekyll Island gathering at JP Morgan's hunting lodge, and the fact that both parties are beholden to the systemic risks, bubbles, and busts that the Fed creates.

It was just frankly inspiring to see a broad cross-section of Americans gathered peacefully on a beautiful Sunday afternoon in Colorado to protest our monetary policy and educate one another on the most important issue our country faces. Dr. Paul's message is alive and well out here and more are making their way over to our side of liberty!

Best,
Adam

Goldmanite Being Pushed for Head of the Financial Stability Board

Canada wants its central bank governor, Mark Carney, to head the Financial Stability Board.

"I would hope that that would happen," Finance Minister Jim Flaherty told reporters when asked if Carney would replace Italy's Mario Draghi as chairman of the FSB, a body comprised of global financial regulators, reports Reuters.

Carney spent thirteen years with Goldman Sachs in its London, Tokyo, New York and Toronto offices. His positions included co-head of sovereign risk.


The FSB was established to coordinate at the international level the work of national financial authorities. It brings together national authorities responsible for financial stability in international financial centers, international financial institutions, sector-specific international groupings of regulators and supervisors, and committees of central bank experts.

If Carney gets the FSB position, it would mean that Goldmanites control two of the most powerful global financial organizations. Carney at FSB and Mario Draghi as head of the European Central Bank.

More Confusion for Keynesians: Car Sales Soar

General Motors said its U.S. sales jumped 20% to 207,145 vehicles compared with September 2010. Chrysler sales surged 27% to 127,334 vehicles, marking the company's best September since 2007.

Volkswagen of America said sales of its VW brand rose 36% to 27,036 vehicles in September.

Bottom line: When the Fed prints money, the economy is distorted in favor of sectors of the economy that benefit from capital infusions, e.g. the auto sector.

But Keynesians are confused by it all:

"The pace was ahead of people’s expectations... said Johnathan Browning, chief executive of Volkswagen of America.

Report from Occupy Wall Street: "All Socialists Will Huddle at Such-and-Such Area."

An EPJ reader reports from "Occupy Wall Street" (Charlotte Edition)

I went to the Oct 1 Occupy Charlotte GA ( General Assembly) at Marshall Park.

After a few hours, a sort of meeting was organized; it was reminiscent of a mass wedding; I wish I had recorded it.

An organizer began reading a script in the way that a minister reads wedding vows, with pauses for the audience to repeat each phrase. The first order of business was an agreement that organizing committee names would be drawn from a hat. The inner circle were known to each other in advance. I could not see the hat, or the people drawing the names, so I can't say exactly what happened, but I can conjecture.

In any case, organizers were selected from the hat. The very next order of business, I kid you not, was "All socialists will huddle at such-and-such area."

Silence. The rest of us are wondering, OK, are they going to suggest any other groups? Next announcement: organize in small groups any way you want.

The self-identified socialists huddle. By some miraculous coincidence, the anointed leaders are all socialists.

Next item: small groups, each led by one "leader", Ostensible purpose of groups: to determine whether we shall march or not. Two people in my group, including myself, asked "any discussion about an agenda, demands, anything like that?" The leader then revealed the real purpose of these meetings - to identify possible "troublemakers." He attacked me, accusing me of trying to "poison the well."

I don't know about other groups, but this was clearly planned as a front for the local socialists. I do not mean people who are sort-of-socialist, like John McCain; I mean people with signs or t-shirts identifying themselves as socialist thus-and-so - card-carrying self-identified socialists. It wasn't the least bit subtle.