Partisanship

I have a large number of friends and acquaintances that are wearing blinders about the current political horse race. Or, in the terms of a meme I have been talking about, they have a template they are placing over all the facts in the election. I can see someone looking at the issues and evaluating the candidates based on how they weigh the various factors, but the anger of partisanship makes no sense to me. It reminds me of an old joke I heard about two people arguing, one a communist and the other an anarcho-capitalist. One said to the other, “Our Jews are better than your Jews.” 

Be that as it may, I fail to see how this is relevant. 

I have heard it suggested that, based on the nominees, neither party really wants to win. This would include in my opinion small 3rd parties like the Constitution Party and the Libertarian Party. Whoever is elected might end up the overseer of the coming economic and budgetary disaster that is already baked into our government spending cake. While I doubt anyone really thinks that way and actually wants to lose the election, whichever party is elected, they will be blamed if things go badly and might be out of power for a generation. 

The “Darth Vaderizing” of one’s political opponents accomplishes nothing but self-deception. I was self-deceived for years so I understand the process. Both Romney and Obama have placed themselves in political boxes that limit their options. For Romney it is his inability to understand that, as a part of a whole package, military spending must be cut. Obama has built a similar box over entitlements like Medicare and Medicaid.

But what can’t continue won’t continue. 

Romney’s attack on Obama’s “cuts” in military spending is not fair—Obama has proposed no cuts, only slight decreases in the planned increase in spending for the military. Obama’s attack on Romney’s “cuts” to seniors is not fair—Romney has proposed no cuts, only slight decreases in the planned increase in medical spending for future seniors who are 55 or younger. Since I am 58, I support this. 

My great hope is that Romney is an even bigger liar than he appears and will actually accomplish something if he is elected. This is wildly optimistic. Obama seems beyond hope. 

This is not enough reason for me to vote for Romney. I will vote in the election as there are some really odd ballot initiatives in California—one that seems to make the governor almost a dictator, for example. 

But me, vote for Obamney? No thanks. 

How Did He Know The Unemployment Rate Would Drop?

On Facebook I said that the unemployment numbers were fake. This was not well recieved. Here is a Rick Santelli rant on the subject you might find interesting. 

How did he know? He knows how government works. 

Two Short Videos on the Israeli Palestinian Conflict

The first of these videos is from the Palestinian perspective. If you are surprised by the king of Jordan referred to as a Hashemite, understand that his family is not well liked by the Palestinians. 

The second video favors the Israeli's viewpoint. Note that the Hashemite dynasty originally supported the first proposed Palestinian solution. 

Note that one aspect of the establishment of Israel was the purchase of land from absentee landlords. The tenant farmers were then expelled from the land in 1948. 

Personally I think both of these perspectives are mostly accurate.

Obama 2016

Obama 2016 is in many ways a faulty documentary. 

It begins with an interesting discussion of Obama’s early life. But the documentary almost immediately “goes off the rails.” It is very bizarre for a person from India to praise Colonialism. While Leopold II of Belgium is not mentioned in the documentary, obviously his example is not beneficial to the defense of Colonialism, his example is illustrative of the period. Why did Leopold take control of the Congo and run it like his own personal fiefdom? It was not because he loved black people. He made lots of money by exploiting the populace. 

Here is how Wikipedia summarizes it:

Leopold extracted a fortune from the Congo, initially by the collection of ivory, and after a rise in the price of rubber in the 1890s, by forcing the population to collect sap from rubber plants. Villages were required to meet quotas on rubber collections, and individuals’ hands were cut off if they didn’t meet the requirements. His regime was responsible for the death of an estimated 5 to 15 million Congolese. This became one of the most infamous international scandals of the early 20th century, and Leopold was ultimately forced to relinquish control of it to the government of Belgium.  

Leopold was not a nice man. Pam Dewey, the beloved editor of this blog, is giving a seminar here on the prophecy podcast next Monday, on the last day of the Feast of Tabernacles, on hell. If there is a hell like the traditional idea says, Leopold is there. 

After defending the theft and murder of the colonial period, similar to the defense of concentration camps by Michelle Malkin, Dinesh D’Souza gets even stranger and dons the mantle of a prophet. Dinesh should leave that to us professionals. While I disagree with Obama’s policies, I do not think his purpose is to destroy America. Never believe in a conspiracy theory when the data is better explained by incompetence and stupidity. 

If you decide to watch the documentary, watch it with a critical eye. 

Since the documentary has been removed from Youtube, here is a trailer of the movie. 

Simpson-Bowles

Alan Simpson appeared on Capital Account recently. Senator Simpson was co-chair with Erskine Bowles to the deficit reduction commission (often called Simpson-Bowles) which was basically ignored by everyone. He made several interesting points.

But first let me comment on the point Simpson didn’t make. As fellow blogger Eric Anderson pointed out in his commentary on the video, every time that tax increases were offered in exchange for spending cuts, we got the tax increases, but did not get the spending cuts. The main reason for this is that one Congress cannot bind a later Congress. Deficit hawks like me have every reason to be suspicious of promised spending cuts. 

Simpson also explained why Ryan voted against the final Simpson-Bowles commission recommendation. There was one specific reason. Under current law if a business provides health care it can deduct the cost of the health care from its gross receipts. Simpson-Bowles eliminated this deduction. What this would mean is that most businesses would have no choice but to cancel health care for its employees. I would. This would place many employees into the Medicaid system and overload it. The proverbial elephant in the room that no one is addressing, including Simpson Bowles, is health care.

I voted for Perot in 1992. I suggest Poirot for 2012. Simpson’s most important point is that ultimately the market will force the government’s hand. This is another ignored point that I have been harping on since the inception of the prophecy podcast blog. Governments have three basic sources of income: taxes, borrowing, and printing money. The reason we see austerity in Greece, and now Spain, is that they have no choice. They cannot raise taxes any more, nor can they borrow or print money, they have to cut spending.  Tax receipts are going down and no one with any brains will lend them money. Of course the European central bank can print money. The ECB is lending Greece money, and also it is lending to Spanish banks, who then lend to the Spanish government. Europe’s leadership is brain dead. Soon we will find out how many “little gray cells,” as Hercule Poirot would say, the America elites have. I am not hopeful.

Sooner or later the big one will come. Simpson was very pessimistic on how long we have until we “hit the wall.” He said that we could not predict the trigger that will start the next crisis—he said it could be 6 weeks, or 6 months or 3 years. I think that those of us who could be categorized as deficit hawks underestimate the time we have left. The economy is resilient. I have been saying 3 to 7 years. Japan is just now starting this process. If we repeat the Japanese scenario we have about ten years of recession before the big one hits.

My friends and readers that vote have an interesting “Sophie’s Choice.” They can vote for Romney who will decrease the economic risk of catastrophe by a few years, but increase the short term risk by war. Or they can vote for a slightly less warmongering Obama, and let the economic malaise continue unabated.

Here is Capital Account.