Democrats should move their convention. The people of North Carolina need to be shown what people everywhere need to learn: If you don't vote the way we tell you, your vote doesn't count!
You are only useful at election time, and it you don't vote for the machine, then you don't matter. Of course, if you do vote for the machine, then you don't matter either.
Thursday, May 10, 2012
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
What Is A New Barbarian?
The North Carolina election results have some Hollywood liberals upset. They define Barbarians as anyone who is unenlightened enough to disagree with them. And they may impose the ultimate sanction within their power - deny them invitations to 'all the right parties'.
Barbarians tend to be pragmatic and realistic, not insulated and iconoclastic. They reexamine things daily, and don't mind testing some of those liberal truths that don't hold up.
When the Romans said Rome was invincible, Barbarians checked out their capabilities and decided it was not true, and that what was best for the Barbarians was to challenge the Romans. That is what is happened to Democrats in 2010, and it is happening again in 2012.
The people who voted in North Carolina think society is better off with male female households and real limited federal powers. The people in other states do too.
Barbarians tend to be pragmatic and realistic, not insulated and iconoclastic. They reexamine things daily, and don't mind testing some of those liberal truths that don't hold up.
When the Romans said Rome was invincible, Barbarians checked out their capabilities and decided it was not true, and that what was best for the Barbarians was to challenge the Romans. That is what is happened to Democrats in 2010, and it is happening again in 2012.
The people who voted in North Carolina think society is better off with male female households and real limited federal powers. The people in other states do too.
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Supreme Surprise?
Liberals seem to be shocked that the Supreme Court justices are unabashedly taking potshots at Obama-care and taking delight in showing the administration and especially the Solicitor General how embarrassing and difficult it is to defend the indefensible!
Supreme court justices may lack the incredible narcissistic egos of liberal politicians, but they do have egos, and after the disrespectful comments from the administration after the Citizens United decision, they should have known somebody was going to get publicly bitch slapped at oral arguments. McCain Feingold also sought to radically alter the relationship between the government and the governed, in complete defiance of the Constitution, because it was 'reasonably necessary'!
I got the impression, however, that some of the justices still think that if the legislation is 'reasonably necessary' then it should be enacted even if it is completely at odds with the Constitution. This may be the safe harbor that the three liberals who have already decided (and perhaps brokered) their vote will seek to shelter them.
What if a law was Constitutionally sound but so expensive that it clearly would not work in practice. Would the Court simply rule on legal arguments and wash its hands of implementation issues? Or would it tie itself in knots to find a way to declare it was not constitutional?
When the converse is true, and a law is clearly at odds with the Constitution, but may solve some economic issue, is it okay to tie those knots to try to find a way declare it Constitutionally sound?
Supreme court justices may lack the incredible narcissistic egos of liberal politicians, but they do have egos, and after the disrespectful comments from the administration after the Citizens United decision, they should have known somebody was going to get publicly bitch slapped at oral arguments. McCain Feingold also sought to radically alter the relationship between the government and the governed, in complete defiance of the Constitution, because it was 'reasonably necessary'!
I got the impression, however, that some of the justices still think that if the legislation is 'reasonably necessary' then it should be enacted even if it is completely at odds with the Constitution. This may be the safe harbor that the three liberals who have already decided (and perhaps brokered) their vote will seek to shelter them.
What if a law was Constitutionally sound but so expensive that it clearly would not work in practice. Would the Court simply rule on legal arguments and wash its hands of implementation issues? Or would it tie itself in knots to find a way to declare it was not constitutional?
When the converse is true, and a law is clearly at odds with the Constitution, but may solve some economic issue, is it okay to tie those knots to try to find a way declare it Constitutionally sound?
What to do with Zimmerman?
I note that prominent Democrats are calling for restraint and justice in the Trayvon Martin case, and all of them are united in their desire to make sure that no one is deprived of their civil liberties!
One of the most respected Democrats has called for Zimmerman to be arrested and detained for his own safety: http://bit.ly/HeKmUs
Another, no lesser light, Maxine Waters, perhaps the intellectual giant of the party, has assured us that this is a hate crime: http://bit.ly/HlX1Hc
I know President Obama takes his oath and duty as the nation's top law enforcement officer seriously, and he is monitoring this case closely, even while busy planning arms control concessions. If he thought the Black Panther Party bounty on Zimmerman was out of line, he would have said so!
Since this president has been given unprecedented power to arrest and detain US citizens indefinitely and without a hearing, he should immediately arrest and detain Zimmerman, at least until November!
One of the most respected Democrats has called for Zimmerman to be arrested and detained for his own safety: http://bit.ly/HeKmUs
Another, no lesser light, Maxine Waters, perhaps the intellectual giant of the party, has assured us that this is a hate crime: http://bit.ly/HlX1Hc
I know President Obama takes his oath and duty as the nation's top law enforcement officer seriously, and he is monitoring this case closely, even while busy planning arms control concessions. If he thought the Black Panther Party bounty on Zimmerman was out of line, he would have said so!
Since this president has been given unprecedented power to arrest and detain US citizens indefinitely and without a hearing, he should immediately arrest and detain Zimmerman, at least until November!
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Soccer Disgrace
When I first heard about the US getting completely snookered, and not even getting an invite to the soccer competition for the upcoming Olympics, I was at a loss as to how we could solve this problem. But the disgrace of being shut out from a competition that most European countries qualified for is almost unbearable. I thought the smart folks were telling us that the USA needs to be more like the European Social(ist) Democracies, not less!
Perhaps we should turn to outcome based solutions, meaning that we simply declare that all countries should get to participate in the tournament. After all, that's only fair!
Perhaps we should take affirmative action! Demand lower standards for countries with less soccer tradition and opportunity!
But if the Supreme Court rules that Obama Care is constitutional, the problem can be easily solved! We will simply mandate that all schools must hire more soccer coaches and all students must enroll in soccer programs year round! Soon we will join the world community and hold our heads up high.
Perhaps we should turn to outcome based solutions, meaning that we simply declare that all countries should get to participate in the tournament. After all, that's only fair!
Perhaps we should take affirmative action! Demand lower standards for countries with less soccer tradition and opportunity!
But if the Supreme Court rules that Obama Care is constitutional, the problem can be easily solved! We will simply mandate that all schools must hire more soccer coaches and all students must enroll in soccer programs year round! Soon we will join the world community and hold our heads up high.
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
The $80T Debt Elephant in the Room
Our government is now so deeply indebted that all macroeconomic policy choices are subjugated to doing whatever can be done to keep interest rates down.
If they had not stayed at historic lows for this long, and interest payments on the debt were thus much larger, everyone would recognize we were broke. If rates were at normal levels. even the happy talkers of the midstream media could not pretend that everything was fine.
If interest rates returned to the levels of the early 1980's, the federal government could not even pay the interest, much less the principal!
Inflation cannot be artificially depressed like interest rates. It is now over 5% and climbing, even though the economy is not growing very fast, if at all. So even if you are sitting on cash, the government's desperate need to keep rates down is sucking money right out of your pocket.
But it's a heck of good way to make sure that everyone becomes dependent on the 'Givernment' for subsistence!
If they had not stayed at historic lows for this long, and interest payments on the debt were thus much larger, everyone would recognize we were broke. If rates were at normal levels. even the happy talkers of the midstream media could not pretend that everything was fine.
If interest rates returned to the levels of the early 1980's, the federal government could not even pay the interest, much less the principal!
Inflation cannot be artificially depressed like interest rates. It is now over 5% and climbing, even though the economy is not growing very fast, if at all. So even if you are sitting on cash, the government's desperate need to keep rates down is sucking money right out of your pocket.
But it's a heck of good way to make sure that everyone becomes dependent on the 'Givernment' for subsistence!
Saturday, March 3, 2012
A-Si Bye Bye
It is not surprising that amorphous silicon no longer commands respect in the photo-voltaic market place, at least for grid connected power applications. See http://bit.ly/Aeoqry
When Applied Materials and Oerlikon began offering turnkey production lines, doing a little life cycle cost and revenue analysis showed that 95% of the total lifetime net present value of the line went to the supplier of the line as a capital investment in the purchase price. And that assumed that poly-silicon and x-Si prices stayed high or declined slowly. If you did a forecast scenario where x-Si pricess dropped to their current levels, that figure rose well above 100%!
The primary achievement of this technology was the marketing and selling process used to put this kind of deal over on the solar investors caught up in the tulip craze!
A-Si still holds the record for highest ratio of investor losses suffered versus monies paid to the inventors/developers of the technology. Just look at the example of ECD and "Ovonics" for a business school case. Stan O is still chuckling.
But it looks like the massive investments in CIGS PV module production lines for a product that still costs more than x-Si instead of less will soon compete for that crown, with Solyndra the most publicized candidate firm to make it into the Harvard classroom studies, but there are definitively some other worthy contenders in the race.
When Applied Materials and Oerlikon began offering turnkey production lines, doing a little life cycle cost and revenue analysis showed that 95% of the total lifetime net present value of the line went to the supplier of the line as a capital investment in the purchase price. And that assumed that poly-silicon and x-Si prices stayed high or declined slowly. If you did a forecast scenario where x-Si pricess dropped to their current levels, that figure rose well above 100%!
The primary achievement of this technology was the marketing and selling process used to put this kind of deal over on the solar investors caught up in the tulip craze!
A-Si still holds the record for highest ratio of investor losses suffered versus monies paid to the inventors/developers of the technology. Just look at the example of ECD and "Ovonics" for a business school case. Stan O is still chuckling.
But it looks like the massive investments in CIGS PV module production lines for a product that still costs more than x-Si instead of less will soon compete for that crown, with Solyndra the most publicized candidate firm to make it into the Harvard classroom studies, but there are definitively some other worthy contenders in the race.
Friday, March 2, 2012
Light Squared Stupidity
The idea that Light squared got a raw deal from the FCC is a joke!
Any moderately competent communications engineer could tell you their proposed system was certain to encounter problems with GPS. The only uncertainty was whether the problems would be serious or very serious!
http://onforb.es/AlQgEV
The technical evaluation that let them explore this system was massively biased in their favor. They just could not move the shares to the greater fools before someone woke up to how flawed the plan was.
Iridium failed because the company did not do proper market validation. Light squared did not do proper technical validation, or they thought they could politically influence the FCC process and sell to uninformed investors.
In this case the market worked. Let's let it work all the time.
Any moderately competent communications engineer could tell you their proposed system was certain to encounter problems with GPS. The only uncertainty was whether the problems would be serious or very serious!
http://onforb.es/AlQgEV
The technical evaluation that let them explore this system was massively biased in their favor. They just could not move the shares to the greater fools before someone woke up to how flawed the plan was.
Iridium failed because the company did not do proper market validation. Light squared did not do proper technical validation, or they thought they could politically influence the FCC process and sell to uninformed investors.
In this case the market worked. Let's let it work all the time.
Friday, February 3, 2012
Obama the Magic Christian
During the 2008 presidential campaign, the Los Angeles Times dubbed Barack Obama "The Magic Negro" (see http://lat.ms/19OXDX ), a black man so wonderful that he is magic. His past positions and associations cannot be examined or criticized. He must be the collective recipient of massive white guilt, and formerly evil and intransigent dictatorships will change their policies simply because he exists. He can unite us, and magically boost the economy. So we owe it to ourselves to vote for him. The election part worked for him, and the unions, but the economy and foreign relations stuff somehow never did work out for the rest of us.
With apologies to the venerable old film, for 2012 Barack Obama is trying to become "The Magic Christian". He's got lots of (borrowed) money for "good people" who will vote for him. His policies are based in the bible, and those who oppose them are not only racist (2008) but not good Christians (2012). See http://cnnmon.ie/zAyAM8.
Besides the very selective adoption of only those Christian principles that can be distorted to align with his socialist and labor union agendas, the whole approach smacks of a "soft theocracy of liberalism" that holds that a policy is good because of its intent and religious arguments, not that it produces results. Of course, growing up in a primarily Muslim society, Obama may see theocracy as a good thing, as long as he is the anointed theocratic leader. And that's the real problem with both theocracy and liberalism - they don't produce good results!
With apologies to the venerable old film, for 2012 Barack Obama is trying to become "The Magic Christian". He's got lots of (borrowed) money for "good people" who will vote for him. His policies are based in the bible, and those who oppose them are not only racist (2008) but not good Christians (2012). See http://cnnmon.ie/zAyAM8.
Besides the very selective adoption of only those Christian principles that can be distorted to align with his socialist and labor union agendas, the whole approach smacks of a "soft theocracy of liberalism" that holds that a policy is good because of its intent and religious arguments, not that it produces results. Of course, growing up in a primarily Muslim society, Obama may see theocracy as a good thing, as long as he is the anointed theocratic leader. And that's the real problem with both theocracy and liberalism - they don't produce good results!
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
BBC Silly Syllogisms
This morning the Beeb carried a story about American's perceptions of the French. I know the BBC has impeccable Liberal credentials, but they used to have at least some standards that governed their rhetoric.
I guess strictly speaking it was an 'infotorial' even though it was embedded between news items. I think the piece stemmed from the web and video pamphlet work being done in South Carolina on Newt Romney. The silly syllogism used against Romney was: John Kerry speaks French (because he is an educated and therefore liberal man); John Kerry was an electoral disaster; Mitt Romney speaks French; and therefore Romney could not be be elected either. The first three premises are fine, but the final one does not follow.
The BBC BS endeavored to go them one better: Most Americans speak only English (punctuated with the old saw about "what do you call a man who speaks only one language"); Obama is apologizing for America and Americans don't like it; Obama is only apologetic for Americans who speak only English (which is silly on its face); and therefore criticism of Obama comes from uneducated people. The first premise is okay (but after all, all that melting pot stuff is so passe' in this enlightened and post constitutional Obama era) but Obama apologized for a lot more than that, and in fact seems to believe that America is the major force for evil in the world. This silly syllogism is analogous to very successful one that concludes that any criticism of Obama stems from racism and racism only.
Kerry is only relevant in reminding us why most Senators would make terrible Presidents. Both Kerry and Al Gore should be grateful to Al Franken for taking away the title of biggest stuffed shirt fool in the Senate. Okay I guess all three are relevant in that way.
A new old saw: What do you call a man that speaks only Spanish? An unregistered democrat voter.
I guess strictly speaking it was an 'infotorial' even though it was embedded between news items. I think the piece stemmed from the web and video pamphlet work being done in South Carolina on Newt Romney. The silly syllogism used against Romney was: John Kerry speaks French (because he is an educated and therefore liberal man); John Kerry was an electoral disaster; Mitt Romney speaks French; and therefore Romney could not be be elected either. The first three premises are fine, but the final one does not follow.
The BBC BS endeavored to go them one better: Most Americans speak only English (punctuated with the old saw about "what do you call a man who speaks only one language"); Obama is apologizing for America and Americans don't like it; Obama is only apologetic for Americans who speak only English (which is silly on its face); and therefore criticism of Obama comes from uneducated people. The first premise is okay (but after all, all that melting pot stuff is so passe' in this enlightened and post constitutional Obama era) but Obama apologized for a lot more than that, and in fact seems to believe that America is the major force for evil in the world. This silly syllogism is analogous to very successful one that concludes that any criticism of Obama stems from racism and racism only.
Kerry is only relevant in reminding us why most Senators would make terrible Presidents. Both Kerry and Al Gore should be grateful to Al Franken for taking away the title of biggest stuffed shirt fool in the Senate. Okay I guess all three are relevant in that way.
A new old saw: What do you call a man that speaks only Spanish? An unregistered democrat voter.
Eurobond Haircut brought home
We learned in Finance 101 that US Treasury bonds were not risk free, but were the lowest risk available and thus the standard of comparison.
To put the Euro mess in perspective, the original deal offered bond holders who were expecting to receive 100 euros at maturity were offered 79 or a "21% haircut". The when that deal flopped, 50. The latest offer is 22. It is not surprising that the bond holders that sold their bonds early for 50 are pleased. It is also not surprising that many who did not sell are refusing to accept the latest deal just on the principle (pun eschewed) that it is not a haircut, but a fatal scalping.
When Obama forced the GM rescue deal, the bondholders took a big haircut, and lost their usual position in front of unsecured creditors. In effect, the money the bondholders lost went to union pension funds. So the original deal that the bond owners thought they had was 'strong armed' by government to be something else. This has permanently increased the 'perceived risk' of buying bonds, raising the cost of corporate finance money in a capital intensive global economy.
The "Greek Effect" will do the same thing for government borrowing.
The not yet widely reported proposal by the Obama administration to refinance a large number of mortgages at the expense of the lenders to win votes before the November elections would permanently increase the cost of mortgages down the road and will create a whole new 'layer' of people who will never again qualify for a mortgage.
Unexpected consequences are one thing, but the Obama administration was warned of all these things (mostly by people who resigned when their warnings were ignored) and went ahead anyway, since the payoff was at the next election and the negative long term consequences were at least another election away.
The PT Barnum theory of American politics is thus reinforced.
To put the Euro mess in perspective, the original deal offered bond holders who were expecting to receive 100 euros at maturity were offered 79 or a "21% haircut". The when that deal flopped, 50. The latest offer is 22. It is not surprising that the bond holders that sold their bonds early for 50 are pleased. It is also not surprising that many who did not sell are refusing to accept the latest deal just on the principle (pun eschewed) that it is not a haircut, but a fatal scalping.
When Obama forced the GM rescue deal, the bondholders took a big haircut, and lost their usual position in front of unsecured creditors. In effect, the money the bondholders lost went to union pension funds. So the original deal that the bond owners thought they had was 'strong armed' by government to be something else. This has permanently increased the 'perceived risk' of buying bonds, raising the cost of corporate finance money in a capital intensive global economy.
The "Greek Effect" will do the same thing for government borrowing.
The not yet widely reported proposal by the Obama administration to refinance a large number of mortgages at the expense of the lenders to win votes before the November elections would permanently increase the cost of mortgages down the road and will create a whole new 'layer' of people who will never again qualify for a mortgage.
Unexpected consequences are one thing, but the Obama administration was warned of all these things (mostly by people who resigned when their warnings were ignored) and went ahead anyway, since the payoff was at the next election and the negative long term consequences were at least another election away.
The PT Barnum theory of American politics is thus reinforced.
Friday, January 13, 2012
Obama Streamling
Why the sudden concern with making fedgov more efficient, after three years of growing the bureaucracy at a record pace? Obama asks for power to combine agencies
It's called 'get your people in the right spots'. All the consolidation will be under folks who are on board with doing what the party wants: more union workers, more government workers voting and volunteering for and contributing to the democrat party, and more programs for 'professional voters' to achieve that magic 55% that vote democrat to keep the 'benefits' flowing.
Is this the beginning of a journey from the United States of America the land of opportunity to the Republic of Haven and the 'basic living stipend'?
It is up to the voters!
It's called 'get your people in the right spots'. All the consolidation will be under folks who are on board with doing what the party wants: more union workers, more government workers voting and volunteering for and contributing to the democrat party, and more programs for 'professional voters' to achieve that magic 55% that vote democrat to keep the 'benefits' flowing.
Is this the beginning of a journey from the United States of America the land of opportunity to the Republic of Haven and the 'basic living stipend'?
It is up to the voters!
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Rick Perry just lost me
Perry's "vulture capitalist" Romney rhetoric tells me its politics as usual rather than being true to conservative principles.
Either Governor Perry doesn't understand how financial markets and private property works (which I doubt) or he is willing to lie to folks who do lack that understanding to get their votes.
Adios, Mofo.
Either Governor Perry doesn't understand how financial markets and private property works (which I doubt) or he is willing to lie to folks who do lack that understanding to get their votes.
Adios, Mofo.
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Trendspotting
Does it disturb anyone else that Obama is pushing the envelope on recess appointments just after gaining the power to use the military to detain US citizens indefinitely without a hearing? Or after gaining the power to 'pull the switch' on the internet when it is 'in the national interest'?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)