Economic Sanctions causes Collapse in Iranian Rial and Protests against Iranian Regime

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 7th, 2012

Week in Review

The economic sanctions are making their mark in Iran.  The people are suffering the economic consequences.  But so far it doesn’t look like it’s encouraging any change in official Iranian position on their nuclear program.  At least, not yet.  For the Iranian regime is beating back the protestors (see Iranian discontent rises as riot police fight protesters by Robert Tait, David Blair posted 10/3/2012 on The Telegraph).

Security forces used tear gas and batons against demonstrators angered by a dramatic collapse in the national currency, the rial, which has lost about a third of its value against the US dollar since Sunday. The hour by hour decline of the currency provides vivid evidence of the damage wrought by international sanctions, which were imposed because of Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

There were voting irregularities in the 2009 Iranian elections.  Protests erupted throughout Iran.  And the Iranian regime suppressed them.  President Obama did not support the protesters.  Nor demand that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad step down.  Even though the Iranian regime is an enemy of the United States.  They are an active sponsor of terrorism.  And a threat to regional peace.  But when the Arab Spring reached our ally, Hosni Mubarak in Egypt, President Obama demanded that he stepped down.  Even though he didn’t use his army to suppress his people.  Now the country is run by the Muslim Brotherhood.  And is moving closer to Iran.

With the invasion of Iraq Libya made peace with the United States.  They were no longer a threat to the United States.  Or regional peace.  Yet President Obama committed military force to support the opposition in their civil war.    When the Arab Spring moved on to Syria, an Iranian ally, supporter of terrorism, home of Hezbollah, President Obama made no move to support the opposition.  And Syria has degenerated into a bloody civil war.  Sending refugees across borders.  And causing cross-border incidents.  The very thing the Obama administration warned of in Libya.  And used to justify their support in that conflict.

American foreign policy these days may appear a bit confusing to our friends and allies.  The U.S. is supporting sanctions against Iran to get them to abandon their nuclear programs.  Which probably would not have advanced as far had the Iranian protests in 2009 led to a regime change.  But the U.S. did not support the protestors.  Unlike in Egypt and Libya.  Nations that weren’t enemies of the United States.  Like Iran is.  So it will be interesting to see where these new protests may lead to.  Hopefully they will end well for the Iranian people.

Behind the rial’s decline lies a precipitous fall in Iranian oil exports, which have dropped from about 2.5 million barrels per day last year to 1.1 million barrels in August, according to the International Energy Agency. This has deprived Iran of billions of dollars of revenues and exposed the regime’s failure to avoid the damage caused by sanctions.

The collapse of the currency reflects a general loss of public confidence. The anti-government website, Kalemeh, cited eyewitnesses accounts that demonstrators demanded the overthrow of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

The collapse of the rial makes it far more expensive for Iranian companies to buy imported goods. Mr Kushner said the latest decline “means that most Iranian importers simply cannot afford to pay for goods if they must use the free market rate.”

Instead of trading with the West, Iran has tried to buy more goods from countries likes China, India and particularly Turkey. However, the fall in the currency raises the price of imports across the board, meaning that they could become unaffordable. “We will see a real financial crisis in the coming months because the economy cannot sustain this,” said Mr Kushner. “It is bad, but will become a lot worse.”

With the fall in oil revenues the state has to make up for that revenue by other means.  And it looks like they’ve depreciated their currency.  That is, they’ve printed rials.  Making them worth less.  Which can be hidden somewhat in a closed economy.  But not with international trade.  Because to buy foreign goods you first have to exchange your money for the foreign currency of your trading partner first.  And when your currency is greatly depreciated it doesn’t trade for much foreign currency.  Making those imports very, very expensive.  Taking more and more rials to buy them.  Putting them out of the reach of ordinary Iranians.  Hence the protests.  And the lack of public confidence.

The Iranian people are ready for change.  Will they get it?  Time will tell.  Unfortunately for the Iranians, time didn’t treat them well in 2009.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

North Koreans hate Socialism and Try to Escape what some in the West call a Socialist Paradise

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 10th, 2012

Week in Review

You know who really hates North Korea?  I mean, really, really hates it?  Not just a little.  But a lot.  No, not President Obama.  Not even George W. Bush hated North Korea that much.  No.  The people who really, really hate North Korea are the North Koreans.  Who have to live under tyranny, poverty and famine.  So they try to escape their socialist ‘paradise’ by escaping across the border (see N.Koreans Keep Fleeing Despite Tough Border Controls posted 3/11/2012 on The Chosunilbo).

The group said a five-member family from Musan, North Hamgyong Province suddenly disappeared on Feb. 17. Although the entire border nearby was shut down and searched, nobody was able to find them. Five days later, a worker at a cooperative farm in Onsong, North Hamgyong Province was arrested for crossing the river, and another person was arrested in China after making it across. On Feb. 23, two women who tried to cross the river from Hoeryong, North Hamgyong Province were arrested as well…

One defector who held a senior position in the North said, “The North Korean regime is pushing people to construction sites and robbing them of their hard-earned foreign currency” in order to prepare for the centenary of regime founder Kim Il-sung in April.

A researcher at a state-run research institute said, “Poverty is a major factor pushing people out of the country. The underground economy is booming and disparity in wealth has intensified in North Korea. The poorest of the poor, who had a glimmer of hope after the death of Kim Jong-il, now see their hopes thwarted and eventually decide to leave.”

Good Friends said the food shortage is getting worse, with some people saying it is even worse than the famine of the late 1990s. North Korea needs 5 million tons of food a year but only manages to produce 4 million tons. During the famine, food production fell below 3 million tons due to poor harvests and mismanagement.

The Stalinist regime of North Korea is the logical extreme of socialism.  The more the state gets involved in the private sector the worse life gets for those who must live in the private sector.  And when you reach full-blown communism the only way the state can survive is by enslaving their people.  Like in North Korea.  Where they prevent anyone from escaping their socialist ‘paradise’. 

The social democracies in Europe still cling to some vestiges of capitalism.  Why?  Because as of now their people can still escape their social-democracy paradises.  But once they cross the Rubicon and their state capitalism collapses under the weight of their massive debt burdens, they’ll have to arm their borders.  To keep their taxpayers from escaping.  So they can continue to fund the ruling class.  And the ever shrinking middle class who survive only because of their connections to the ruling class.  Sort of like it was back in the days of feudalism.  Only with nicer toys.  For those connected enough to have them.

Communists are anti-capitalists.  Just like all those people on the left who attack capitalism in America.  So what’s the difference between the anti-capitalists in oppressive communist regimes and those in the United States?  Protesting is a lot more fun in the United States than in oppressive communist regimes.  Because of capitalism.  It is capitalism that lets the anti-capitalists take a break from their protesting and enjoy a frothy cappuccino at a conveniently located coffee shop.  While protestors in communist regimes are arrested and sent to prison camps.  Or worse.  Why, capitalism even makes protesting capitalism better.  Something the protestors don’t really think about.  Because for them protesting is all about the fun.  Not the ideology.  And they have no desire to live under what they claim to want.  For anyone who enjoys a frothy cappuccino during a nice outdoor protest will have a rude awakening to see how a communist regime responds to their ‘difference of opinion’.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Occupy Wall Street finds Conflict not Love in Zuccotti Park

Posted by PITHOCRATES - November 27th, 2011

Week in Review

I guess George, John, Paul and Ringo were wrong.  Love isn’t all you need.  You also need conflict resolution services (see Women Bring Peace to Zuccotti Park by Victoria Pynchon posted 11/26/2011 on Forbes).

Peter, Paul and Mary memorably sang “whenever two or more of you are gathered in His name, there is love.” But whenever two or more of us are gathered to build a bridge, stage a protest, or run a business, there is conflict.

Fortunately for Occupy Wall Street in Zuccotti Park, mediators and other peace workers have been providing conflict resolution services to protestors, including daily nonviolent communication training and mediation for conflicts among the occupiers.

Guess that’s what happens when you use your fellow protestors’ part of the commons as your personal toilet.

One thing for sure is that you never heard stuff like this about the Tea Party.  The Tea Party generally cleaned up after themselves.  Didn’t urinate or defecate anywhere but in a proper toilet facility.  And they didn’t want to beat the crap out of their fellow protesters.  Because they all got along.  And they got along with the community they were in.  For there was, dare I say it?  Love.

Everybody now…love, love, love….  All you need is…love, love, love…

Like in the Tea Party.  But apparently not in the Occupy Wall Street movement in Zuccotti Park.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , ,

The Iraqis Support Capitalism while Hugo Chavez and Nancy Pelosi Support the Occupy Wall Street Protesters

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 8th, 2011

Iraq wants American Technology because neither Cuba nor Venezuela gave the World the iPhone

Some say we invade other countries militarily so we can conquer them with corporate imperialism.  Such as the Iraq War.  It was about getting Iraqi oil.  And letting Halliburton lose to rape and pillage at will.  Well, oil prices shot to their highest during the U.S. ‘occupation’.  And Iraq isn’t covered with McDonalds, KFCs and Wal-Marts yet.  In fact, their ain’t much American corporate imperialism going on in the least.  Much to the chagrin of many Iraqis (see If U.S. Leaves Vacuum in Iraq, Iran’s Deep Influence May Not Fill It by Tim Arango posted 10/8/2011 on The New York Times).

Mr. Sharba continued: “We wish that American companies would come here. I wish the American relationship was that, instead of troops, it would be companies.” Mr. Sharba is a cleric, and he spent 14 years in Iran in exile during Mr. Hussein’s government…

But the troublemaking does not extend to the more important arena of commerce, officials say. “Because of the political sensitivities of Iran, many people say Iran is controlling the economy of Iraq,” said Sami al-Askari, a member of Parliament and a close confidant to Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki. “No, the Turks are…”

Iran has also been trying to make inroads culturally, but it is bumping up against the same uneasiness that Iraqis have toward Iran’s business efforts. This year Iran negotiated a deal to refurbish several movie theaters in Baghdad that have been dark for years. Yet the renovations have yet to get under way, and officials say they wish it were the Americans — and their technology — involved in the project. “If a person asks me, who do I want to come help me? I wish that the Americans, by occupying Iraq, would support the culture and theater,” said Fuad Thanon, the head of Iraq’s national theater.

So it’s not the Americans reaping the spoils of war.  It’s the Turks.  And Turkey is doing this because America has chosen not to, apparently.  And the Iranians just plain suck at business.  Which one would expect in a theocracy.

The Occupy Wall Street protestors may hate corporate America and their remarkable technology.  But the Iraqis don’t.  They want it.  Because it’s the best.  I mean, they’re not clamoring for that good Cuban technology.  Or that good Venezuelan technology.  You know why?  Well, suffice it to say that neither Cuba nor Venezuela gave the world the iPhone.

There are more Blacks in the Tea Party than in Nancy Pelosi’s Neighborhood

They say you can judge a lot about a person by the company he or she keeps.  So let’s apply that to the Occupy Wall Street protestors.  Who is the latest to throw her support behind this anti-capitalism mob?  None other than Nancy Pelosi.  One of the most liberal members in the House of Representatives (see Nancy Pelosi Backs Occupy Wall Street Message, Tells Eric Cantor To Shove It by Zeke Miller posted 10/8/2011 on Business Insider).

In an interview with ABC News’ Christiane Amanpour, House Minority Leader Nancy said she supports the message of the Occupy Wall Street protesters that “change has to happen.”

So it’s clear.  Nancy Pelosi is against capitalism.  This comes as no shock.  For she has been against capitalism for years.  She prefers the doling out of privilege.  Where liberal wealth can be confined to her and her liberal friends.  In one of the richest and most exclusive congressional districts in America.  And one of the whitest.  It’s rather ironic, isn’t it?  She calls the Tea Party racist.  Yet there are more blacks in the Tea Party than in her own neighborhood.

“I didn’t hear him say anything when the Tea Party was out demonstrating, actually spitting on members of Congress right here in the Capitol. And he and his colleagues were putting signs in the windows encouraging them. But let’s not get down to that.”

There have been a lot of Tea Party rallies.  A lot of film covering these rallies.  And yet they never captured this spitting incident.  Or any racial hate speech.  You know why?  Because there was no spitting.  And the percentage of racists in the Tea Party is probably less than the national average.  Why, I bet Pelosi’s neighborhood has a higher percentage of racists than the Tea Party has.  And it’s probably higher than the national average.  Because it’s sooo white.  At least that’s what Nancy Pelosi would be saying if it were a Republican district.

If both Pelosi and Chavez support these Wall Street Protestors they can’t be Good for America

Nancy Pelosi is no friend of laissez faire capitalism.  So it’s no surprise that she supports the anti-capitalist protest on Wall Street.  And it’s no surprise that this guy supports it, too (see Hugo Chavez condemns ‘horrible repression’ of Wall Street protests by Enrique Andres Pretel, Reuters, posted 10/8/2011 on The Globe and Mail).

Not surprisingly, Mr. Chavez expressed solidarity with American activists who have been staging rallies and marches against what they view as corporate greed by Wall Street…

Mr. Chavez, who runs for re-election in a year’s time and traditionally ramps up his anti-capitalist rhetoric to try and rally supporters before a vote, also let rip at Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney, who referred to the “malign socialism” of Cuba and Venezuela in a speech on Friday.

That’s why the Iraqis aren’t asking for Venezuelan technology.  They want the best.  And the best comes where capitalism is freest.  Not constrained and maligned.  As in Venezuela.

So Nancy Pelosi and Hugo Chavez see eye to eye on the anti-capitalism protests on Wall Street.  They are simpatico.  They hate capitalism.  They both support the Occupy Wall Street people.  And Chavez hates America.  I’m not saying anything.  But people do judge you by the company you keep.

Since coming to power in 1999, Mr. Chavez has sought to project himself as a leader of a global “anti-imperialist” movement.

He and allies in the ruling Socialist Party have been gloating over economic and social problems in the United States and Europe as evidence of capitalism’s impending downfall.

“Poverty’s growing, the misery is getting worse,” he said, referring to the causes of the U.S. protests. “But that empire is still there, still a threat … (President Barack) Obama is on his way down, for lots of reasons. He was a big fraud.”

Hugo Chavez is no friend of the United States.  Even the Soviets didn’t take such glee in American economic unrest.  Sure, they wanted to win the Cold War.  But not if it imperiled their U.S. food imports.  Which they were dependent on to keep famine at bay.  And this in the country with some of the most fertile soil in the world.  What we call the breadbasket of Europe.  The Ukraine.  But communism just didn’t work.  So they had to import that capitalistic grain.  Despite that great soil.  And a great people.

You know, it just doesn’t look good when you are on the same side of an issue with someone who wants to destroy America.  And if both Pelosi and Chavez support these Wall Street protestors, these protestors can’t be good for America.

These Anti-American People either know Capitalism is the Best Economic System or are just Too Stupid to Know Better

So we didn’t invade Iraq to spread corporate imperialism.  Such as Hugo Chavez would believe.  Even though the Iraqis wouldn’t mind a little bit of it.  Just enough to give them some of the best technology in the world.  To help them back on their feet.  And help them get away from that Iranian crap.

Nancy Pelosi supports the Occupy Wall Street protesters.  As does Hugo Chavez.  Who hates everything American.  He is anti-American.  And anti-capitalist.  But he likes the Occupy Wall Street protesters.  So they can’t be either.  If Chavez likes them.  American.  Or capitalist.  Either that or Chavez is a closet capitalist.  And/or an American lover.

Truth be told these anti-American people are slinging their anti-capitalism BS just for personal gain.  They either know capitalism is the best economic system in the world.  Or they’re just too stupid to know better.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

LESSONS LEARNED #86: “Smug, all-knowing condescension camouflages a vacuous philosophical basis.” –Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 6th, 2011

Ronald Reagan had a B.A. in Economics, Served in the Army, was President of SAG and Served Two Terms as California Governor

The Left hated Ronald Reagan.  They belittled him.  Made snarky comments like ‘he’s just an actor’.  That he wasn’t smart enough to be president.  And not qualified.  For all he could do was give a good speech.  Because he was just an actor.

Yes, he was an actor.  But he did go to college.  Had a B.A. in economics and sociology.   Enlisted in the Army and served in the cavalry.  Earned a commission in the Reserve Officer Corps just before World War II.  Served stateside during World War II making training films for the army.  Severely nearsighted, the Army classified him for limited service only.  Which meant he couldn’t serve overseas.  He served 8 years as president of the Screen Actors Guild (SAG).  During the height of the Red Scare.  Which cemented his anti-communist credentials.  (Yes, there were communists in Hollywood.  As well as in the FDR administration.)  Hosted General Electric Theater for 8 years.  He visited General Electric R&D facilities.  About 135.  Saw job creation up close during his tenure with GE.  Helping to hone his economic views.  He served two terms as California governor.  During the peak of the Vietnam anti-war protests.  When he gave his concession speak at the 1976 Republican Convention, delegates mumbled that they had nominated the wrong man (Gerald Ford).  At the age of 69, Reagan became president.  Despite snarky comments like ‘he’s too old to be president’.

So Reagan had the education.  And a long list of experience on his resume.  Experience that took him through some of the most defining moments of American history.  And spent 8 years as governor of the most populous state.  Eight years of solid executive experience.  So he was every bit qualified for office.  The people who attacked him just didn’t like his ideology.  And the fact that he was very good in elected office.  So they used smug, all-knowing condescension to belittle him.  And it worked well.  For they did not like Reagan on American college campuses.  Where kids parroted what they heard in the media.  And on their favorite shows.  But didn’t have an original thought in their heads.

Incidentally, Barack Obama got a B.S. in political science from Columbia.  And a law degree from Harvard.  He served 3 terms as Illinois state senator.  And 2/3 of a term as U.S. senator.  He had no military experience.  No executive experience.  And his only other experience was confined to academe.  Or law.  Yet those who said Ronald Reagan was not qualified to be president had no problem with Barack Obama.  Go figure.

George W. Bush had an M.B.A. from Harvard, served in the Texas ANG, ran businesses and served two terms as Texas Governor

But compared to George W. Bush, they held Ronald Reagan in great esteem.  For the Left just flat out called Bush an idiot.  And simply too stupid to be president.

For being stupid Bush was pretty well educated.  He had an B.A. in history from Yale.  A good thing for presidents to know.  History.  And he earned an M.B.A. from Harvard.  The only president to have one.  He served stateside in the Texas Air National Guard during Vietnam.  He then worked in the oil industry.  Started up some oil exploration companies.  Bush Exploration, for one.   This merged with Spectrum 7.  Where he served as chairman.  The oil glut of the Eighties hit that company hard.  It later merged with Harken Energy.   Where he served on the board.  He helped Dad run for president.  Bought a piece of the Texas Rangers after that.  Spent five years there as the managing general partner.  Built the value of the team so well that when he sold his chunk he got uber rich.  Then he served about one and a half terms as Texas governor.

This is the man the Left said was too stupid to be president.  This man who had an M.B.A. from Harvard.  One of the most pretentious Ivy League schools.  A man who worked in the energy industry.  And understood it.  Who knew how to run a business.  And did.  Even ran a Major League baseball team.  And had some 6 years of solid executive experience as the governor of the second most populous state.  So he, too, was every bit qualified for office.  The people who attacked him just didn’t like his ideology.  And the fact that he was very good in elected office.  And in the business world.  So they used smug, all-knowing condescension to belittle him.  And it worked well.  For they did not like Bush on American college campuses either.  Where kids parroted what they heard in the media.  And on their favorite shows.  But they didn’t have an original thought in their heads.  Some things just never change.

Incidentally, Barack Obama got a B.S. in political science from Columbia.  And a law degree from Harvard.  He served 3 terms as Illinois state senator.  And 2/3 of a term as U.S. senator.  He had no military experience.  No executive experience.  And his only other experience was confined to academe.  Or law.  Yet those who said George W. Bush was not qualified to be president had no problem with Barack Obama.  Go figure.

They make their Snarky Little Comments about the Greed of Corporations while Greedily Demanding more Government Benefits

And speaking of these college geniuses, you can hear a lot of them doing what they do best.  Whining.  They’re protesting up on Wall Street.  Cause they hate capitalism.  Because their tens of thousands of dollars in student loan debt hasn’t given them a high paying job.  And because they hate capitalism you know they don’t have a business degree.  Or anything that can be used in the business world.  Further, if they don’t want to be a toady to corporate America, they probably don’t have a degree that would help them gain employment with a corporation.  Like a chemistry degree.  An engineering degree.  Or a physics degree.  No.  These would have been too corporate.  And possibly too harmful to the environment.  Not to mention hard.

These protestors are living the protest life of the Sixties.  Complete with free love.  And drugs.  Which, incidentally, is why they went to college.  Not to sit in some boring-ass lectures and take exams with math on them.  And that’s why they’re so angry.  Because during difficult economic times corporations don’t have the money to waste on wasteful degrees like women’s studies.  Art.  Poetry.  French.  Anthropology.  Or some other liberal art or social science.  No.  The only high paying job opportunities for these are in academe.  Or in government.  When they are flush with taxpayer cash.  Thanks to corporations providing real jobs for taxpayers.  But when there are no real jobs, there are no tax dollars to pay for these phony baloney jobs.

So they make their snarky little comments about the greed of corporations.  About the greed of the bankers.  About the greed of Republicans.  All the while they are greedily demanding more government benefits.  Paid for by the very people they are protesting against.  While enjoying the very things these greedy corporations have given them.  They are using wireless technology to live-tweet their latest list of whines.  All technology created by the very corporations they hate.  Produced under the system they want to purge from America.  Capitalism.

If it wasn’t for Capitalism they’d be Working in a Field Somewhere for Subsistence Right Now

Look at Apple.  And Steve Jobs.  Look at what he created.  And ask yourself this.  Why Steve Jobs and not someone in Cuba?  Someone in North Korea?  Someone in the former Soviet Union?  These are three hardcore socialist regimes these protestors admire.  Who have egalitarian systems of government.  Where there is fair-shared misery.  No one lives better than anyone else.  Except those within the party apparatchik.  Which these protestors naturally assume they would be part of.  Once America became fair.  And they stripped the rich of all their wealth.  For the benefit of mankind.  And by mankind I mean these protestors.

Cuba even has a national health care system that is so impressive that Michael Moore made a movie about it.  While condemning the inferior American system.  Cuba is great.  They care about their people there.  So much so that they don’t let them leave.  For fear of the substandard love they’ll get in another nation.  Still some of these fools try to escape their utopia.  By crossing shark-infested water in some of the most unseaworthy boats.  To get to Florida.  In the USA.  To the country that the Wall Street protestors say is worse than Cuba.  If only they had iPhones in Cuba they could get their live-tweet feed from Wall Street so they would know that things are better there.  So they can stay there.  In their utopia.

Of course, it’s not better there.  And Steve Jobs wasn’t a Cuban.  He wasn’t a North Korean.  He wasn’t a Soviet.  He was an American.  An entrepreneur.  And a capitalist.  Who made Apple a rich corporation by giving us things we can’t live without.  Things we never asked for.  Things we didn’t even know about.  Until after he created them.  And he told us how cool they were.

They can make snarky, all-knowing, condescending remarks all day long about corporate greed and the evil of capitalism.  But if it wasn’t for capitalism they’d be working in a field somewhere for subsistence right now.  And the fact that they don’t know this shows how empty headed and brainwashed they are.  And what a piss-poor job our public schools and colleges are doing.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

When Democrat Policies Fail and they Fall in the Polls they Scramble to Endorse Reaganomics

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 5th, 2011

Democrats have Blamed every ill known to Mankind on Reaganomics

The Left hates Ronald Reagan.  Proclaimed the era of Reagan was over.  No more were these Reagan Republicans going to screw over the poor so the rich can live a better life.  Yes, they hated this man with a passion.  And everything he stood for.  This supply-sider of the Austrian School.  He and is unfunny Laffer Curve.  This cold-hearted tax cutter.  But now they love him.  Why?  Because he supported taxing the rich.

I’ll pause a moment for those of you who have fallen out of your chairs.  Ready?  Good.

You know Congressional Democrats are grasping at straws to promote their policies when they claim their archenemy would have supported them, too.  You know why they’re trying, though, don’t you?  If you listened to the protesters on Wall Street you should know.  With their control of public school teachers and college professors (both dependent on taxpayer money for generous pay and benefit packages), they can revise history.  And keep kids ignorant.  Hopefully keeping them oblivious of things they don’t want them to know.  Such as the true legacy of Ronald Reagan (see MILLER: Ripping off the Gipper by Emily Miller posted 10/4/2011 on The Washington Times).

Liberals are trying to twist Ronald Reagan’s words to muster support for raising taxes. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s press office sent a memo on Monday to congressional Republicans claiming they’d found evidence proving that President Reagan was the real inspiration for President Obama’s tax-the-rich “Buffett Rule.” The California Democrat posed the question: “What would Reagan do?”

The correct answer is: He would cut taxes. Mrs. Pelosi’s memo sends people over to the liberal Think Progress website, where a video montage interweaves clips of Mr. Obama and Reagan saying apparently similar things about tax rates. “We’re going to close the unproductive tax loopholes that allow some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share,” said the Gipper.

You’re supposed to think that’s just what Mr. Obama is doing, but the liberals edited out the context of the 40th president’s remarks. In a June 1985 speech at an Atlanta high school, he called for a total overhaul of the tax system. He wanted loopholes closed to lower the tax rates for everyone, for a net reduction in the tax burden. Congressional Republicans point out that’s precisely the opposite of what the Democrats are now trying to do.

You see, the Democrats can’t rely on telling the truth to pass their policies.  Because their policies only benefit those in government.  And those who live like parasites on the wealth creators.  Such as those protestors on Wall Street.  Who want the wealth of the wealth creators.  But want no part of capitalism which created that wealth.  And are too ignorant to understand that you can’t have one without the other.

Thank you public school teachers and college professors.

So they must lie.  Revise history.  To try and fool people into believing that their policies are just like Ronald Reagan’s.  And apparently hoping people don’t remember that Democrats have blamed every ill known to mankind on these very same policies.  ReaganomicsTrickledown economics.  The scourge of mankind.  But the majority of Americans apparently love the big lug so they’ll swallow back their bile and say, hey, we love him, too.  And hope that the grimace on their face doesn’t look as bad or as painful as it feels.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac created America’s Financial Mess, not Wall Street

So where did these Wall Street protests come from?  Where did the primary impetus come from?  Apparently Canada.  Thanks, Canada.  As if the corrupting influence of Terrance and Phillip wasn’t enough already.  So I guess we have to Blame Canada (Warning:  Blame Canada contains adult content) for this, too (see Occupy Toronto leaderless, unfocused but hopeful by Dana Flavelle posted 10/4/2011 on the Toronto Star).

The Wall Street protests were inspired by Canadian anti-consumer magazine Adbusters.

Editor in chief and co-founder Kalle Lasn said he’s been calling for this kind of protest movement for 20 years.

It’s finally happening because people are angry with the financial fraudsters on Wall Street who created America’s economic mess and largely went unpunished, he said in a telephone interview from Vancouver.

But that isn’t who created America’s financial mess.  It was government.  Specifically the government sponsored enterprises (GSE) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  If it wasn’t for them buying and/or guaranteeing risky subprime mortgages there would have been no subprime mortgage crisis.

That was government policy.  Putting as many people into houses as possible.  Even if they couldn’t afford them.  That wasn’t Wall Street.  Wall Street was merely an accessory after the fact.  Aiding and abetting Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  By selling those toxic subprime mortgages in collateralized debt obligations (CDOs).  Promoting them as high yield yet low risk.  Because they were backed by mortgages, historically the safest loans in all of America.  So investors bought these.  Not knowing how risky they were.  But you know who knew how risky they were?  The GSEs Fanny and Freddie.  Because they bought them.  And remember what the ‘G’ stands for in GSE.  Government.

If you removed government from this equation mortgage bankers would not have approved these risky subprime mortgages.  Because that risk would have been on their books.  But when government said ‘don’t worry  we’ll take that risk off of your books’ what did they have to lose in approving risky subprime mortgages?  Less harassment from the government for not approving mortgages for the poor and minorities who didn’t qualify?  Yeah, like they were going to miss that harassment.

If these protestors want to protest those responsible they should protest government.  Not Wall Street.

Damn Canadians.  If it’s not making our kids fart and curse they’re getting them to protest the wrong people.  (Editor’s note:  We like Canada and Canadians.  And mean them no disrespect.  We’re just having a little fun with the movie South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut.  In which incidents lead to war between Canada and the U.S.  A premise so ridiculous that it’s funny.  For Canada and the U.S. have been the best of friends.  And will always be the best of friends.)

The more Public Sector Union Employees paying Dues the more Money is collected for Democrat Coffers

Perhaps that’s the problem.  Too much government.  The federal government has grown into a behemoth.  On top of thousands and thousands of local governments throughout the country (see Infographic: Local government by the numbers by Mary Mahling and Carla Uriona posted 10/4/2011 on Stateline).

There are 89,476 local governments in the United States. They include counties, cities, villages, towns and townships, as well as special districts that handle utilities, fire, police and library services.

That’s a lot of government.  And there’s only one way to pay for a lot of government.  With a lot of taxes.

So we have government upon government upon government.  Surely with all that government we must be getting some value for all of these taxes.

More than two centuries of American democracy have resulted in a profusion of governments at the local level, not only cities and counties but villages and townships, park districts and sanitary districts and a host of others. To those trying desperately to bring a state’s budget into balance, many of these are useless anachronisms incapable of providing any service that could not be provided higher up the governmental chain. But to the tens of thousands of people who hold office in these local entities — and to millions of citizens who live within them — multiple local governments are a crucial piece of evidence that American democracy reaches down to the grassroots level.

Apparently not.  And don’t call me Shirley.

They just provide a lot of jobs for the unemployable.  By taxing the wealth creators.  And redistributing it to people whose job is a duplicate of one at another level of government.

They do serve a purpose, though.  Being totally funded by taxpayers, they have a vested interest to keep raising taxes on the taxpayers.  Which is, of course, helpful to Democrats.  So the more local governments the better.  The more public sector union employees paying dues the more money finds its way into Democrat coffers.

Any Attempt to Quantify Human Behavior will Ultimately Fail

And then you have academe.  And Keynesian economists.  Furthering the growth of government with their government-spending Keynesian economics (see Tis The Gift To Be Simple by Paul Krugman posted 10/5/2011 on The New York Times).

To be sure, IS-LM is an attempt to squeeze a dynamic economy into a static model, which is why people like me usually cross-check our conclusions with something intertemporal. But it’s actually a pretty darn sophisticated approach — as demonstrated by the fact that economists who dismiss or attack IS-LM as too simplistic or something almost always end up making assertions that are much more simplistic than IS-LM, if not falling into outright logical fallacies. In fact, I can’t think of a single exception to this rule: every attack on IS-LM I’ve ever seen (as opposed to suggestions that we should also look at more complex models) was followed by some kind of empirical or logical howler.

I have a criticism.  Any attempt to quantify human behavior will ultimately fail.  Because you can’t quantify human behavior.

Economics belong to the branch of science we call social sciences.  That is, it’s not real science.  Because the wildcard is that human behavior can always produce some unintended consequence to government action.  Such as Prohibition giving us organized crime.  Whereas the equations of science typically don’t.  We can use science to build bridges, buildings and airplanes.  And they work pretty much as planned.  Without any unintended consequences.

You can’t represent human behavior by mathematical formulas.  We know some behavioral responses.  Such as sex in advertising gets men’s attention.  But that’s a base primeval instinct.  There’s not a whole lot of thinking going on.  Not so in a complex economy.  Where there is a lot of thinking going on.  Keynesians like to think the economy is as simple as impulse buying at the point of sale checkout aisle.  Put more candy on display and you sell more candy.  Not so with buying a house.

Everyone will like to own a beautiful home.  But people won’t buy a house on impulse.  Not when there’s record unemployment.  And talk of a double-dip recession.  Because if you learned anything from the subprime mortgage crisis it’s this.  Too much debt is bad.  And there is no such thing as a guaranteed job.  Playing with interest rates won’t change that.  Only time will.  When enough time has passed to let people feel secure in their jobs again.  Then and only then will they consider taking on debt again.  No matter what the IS-LM model predicts.  Because you can’t quantify human behavior.

The Wall Street Protestors with Student Loan Debt Probably don’t have Science or Engineering Degrees

All government policy is social science.  It’s not an exact science.  That’s why strange things happen.  Unintended things.  Whenever government tries to influence behavior.  And when government tries they have a track record of failure.  Which is why they don’t run for reelection on the success of their policies.  They run on the success of someone else’s (Ronald Reagan’s) policies.  And say that their policies are the same.  And they are except with a few minor changes.  And by ‘few’ I mean they couldn’t be any more different.  So they lie.  Or they just demonize their opponents.

But our kids are blissfully ignorant.  Thanks to public school teachers.  And college professors.  Who care more about improving their taxpayer funded pay and benefits than education.  That’s why government grows.  And why we have degrees like women’s studies.  And poetry.  Degrees that offer no hope for employment in a capitalistic economy.  For what business that relies on pleasing their customers (like Apple does consistently) need people with these skills?

No.  They need people with science and engineering degrees.  You know, the hard ones.  So the kids who took the easy route in college must depend on teaching others their worthless knowledge.  Or get a government job.  Which has a lot to do with the anger of these protestors who have huge student loan debt.  And no job.  Because if they hate capitalism you can guess what their degrees are in.

(Editor’s note:  This was written before news of Steve Jobs’ passing broke.  Our condolences go out to his family.  We decided to leave the Apple reference in as a tribute to Steve Jobs.  He was one of America’s greatest entrepreneurs.  The world is a better place because of him.  For the gifts he gave us.  And the inspiration he gave to the next generation of great entrepreneurs.)

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,