This is the worst pain a man can suffer:
to have insight into much and power over nothing.
Herodotus
Reflection on Today's Quote
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
I don't mean to borrow fellow Franco-American Don Boudreaux's (Cafe Hayek) signature tagline, but it's so true. I've had to battle office politics in academia and in the private sector to do the right thing; I've rarely had formal authority, within an organization or with a client, to compel others to my point of view.
I'm an optimist by nature, but there are a few things that are fairly clear:
- We will never close $40+T in unfunded senior entitlement liabilities; the GOP never will have the stomach for the kinds of politically tough decisions necessary because the Dems will argue to seniors that they are for "saving" the unsustainable programs.
- We will never pay off the national debt. It's difficult to see economic growth robust enough given the ongoing regulatory regime. I don't see the political will to impose across the board spending cuts, strip out tax preferences and expenditures. I suspect that the Fed Reserve will try to monetize the debt and destroy the dollar in the process.
- The government spending bubble, the college cost bubble, and the health care bubble are unsustainable.
- Individual liberty is permanently impaired
- Even Paul Ryan's more "Draconian" approaches phase e.g., in entitlements, phase in serious cuts over time.
- Mitt Romney is talking about increasing, not decreasing, the 20% or so of federal spending for DoD. Furthermore, he's not talking about cuts in senior entitlements. When 80% of the budget is off-limits, it's difficult to see where the cuts are coming from.
- Fear-mongering continues to drive us down the road to serfdom. If you look at recent votes on the Patriot Act and cybersecurity, pro-liberty Congressmen votes run to maybe a dozen or two out of hundreds.
Is there a way to turn things around? Yes. But it would require new leadership that is less preachy, more optimistic and more pragmatic, able to build a winning coalition, sort of a new age libertarian-conservative Ronald Reagan. (I mourn the fact of President Reagan's handlers and what might have been given Reagan's professed libertarian/conservative principles.)
I think just like Obama's personality soft-sells his dubious progressive philosophy, Reagan's charisma, optimism and trademark humor soft-sold the conservative message better than his ideological predecessor, the dour Barry Goldwater. But there are flaws to Obama's selling of progressive philosophy: he initially made his sale on his optimism ("Yes, we can!") but then he had--and continues to have--a blindside to the toxic, unattractive aspects of his personality, e.g., the unprecedented attacks on his predecessor and the Supreme Court, his condescending attitude towards people whom disagree with him (e.g., the "cling to their guns and Bibles" moment), his ultra-defensiveness and unwillingness to accept responsibility (except for killing UBL), etc.
Gary Johnson comes across as this generation's Barry Goldwater--good on principle and performance, but rather judgmental and not inspirational. There are some things that Ron Paul and/or Gary Johnson have said that have been unduly provocative and divisive (e.g., foreign policy in the lead up to the 9/11 tragedies). I think it's enough to simply note that foreign meddling is expensive, is unsustainable, and has unintended consequences, not unlike counter-productive government invention in the economy. Speculation about specific events is unnecessary and unhelpful.
What does a new libertarian leadership need to have? A gifted orator with unfailing optimism, speaking of the possibilities of individual liberty, freed from the tyranny of meddlesome self-sustaining stealth empire-building crony government.
I think just like Obama's personality soft-sells his dubious progressive philosophy, Reagan's charisma, optimism and trademark humor soft-sold the conservative message better than his ideological predecessor, the dour Barry Goldwater. But there are flaws to Obama's selling of progressive philosophy: he initially made his sale on his optimism ("Yes, we can!") but then he had--and continues to have--a blindside to the toxic, unattractive aspects of his personality, e.g., the unprecedented attacks on his predecessor and the Supreme Court, his condescending attitude towards people whom disagree with him (e.g., the "cling to their guns and Bibles" moment), his ultra-defensiveness and unwillingness to accept responsibility (except for killing UBL), etc.
Gary Johnson comes across as this generation's Barry Goldwater--good on principle and performance, but rather judgmental and not inspirational. There are some things that Ron Paul and/or Gary Johnson have said that have been unduly provocative and divisive (e.g., foreign policy in the lead up to the 9/11 tragedies). I think it's enough to simply note that foreign meddling is expensive, is unsustainable, and has unintended consequences, not unlike counter-productive government invention in the economy. Speculation about specific events is unnecessary and unhelpful.
What does a new libertarian leadership need to have? A gifted orator with unfailing optimism, speaking of the possibilities of individual liberty, freed from the tyranny of meddlesome self-sustaining stealth empire-building crony government.
What is Wrong With Mitt Romney?
On paper, Mitt Romney may well be the smartest guy to run for President over the past 60 years. Very few people hold both a Harvard Law degree (with honors) and a Harvard Business School MBA (graduating in the top 5% of his class).
In fact, I would say right now, despite what many polls say (with Romney behind in almost every electoral projection I've seen and slipping a bit in battleground state polls after saturation anti-Romney ads), the Presidency is Romney's to lose. Why? We've seen 3 incumbent Presidents defeated for reelection over the past 4 decades: Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, and G.H.W. Bush. In each case, we saw a recession within a year or so of the election.
We aren't in a recession technically: we have had, as any Dem talking head will dubiously remind you, an unbroken string of private sector job gains (since September 2010: see below). (You want to see a Democrat sweat? All it takes is a single month to break that streak--and many months in that streak have been below growth in the labor force.) Looking at the data, we see a familiar pattern--a trio of reasonably strong months--March through May 2010, February though April 2011, and December through February 2012--only to see job growth slump to slump to 3 or more consecutive months of sub-100K job growth. It's almost like a sputtering engine with a weak battery; the engine strains to turn over but eventually stalls; you repeat and the same result. You know the battery is dying and maybe the next time you turn the key, all you'll hear is the dreaded click, click, click.
BLS Total nonfarm
| Year | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | Annual |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2002 | -129 | -146 | -24 | -84 | -9 | 47 | -100 | -11 | -55 | 121 | 8 | -163 | |
| 2003 | 95 | -159 | -213 | -49 | -9 | 0 | 25 | -45 | 109 | 197 | 14 | 119 | |
| 2004 | 162 | 44 | 337 | 249 | 310 | 81 | 46 | 122 | 161 | 348 | 63 | 134 | |
| 2005 | 137 | 240 | 141 | 360 | 170 | 243 | 374 | 193 | 66 | 80 | 334 | 160 | |
| 2006 | 283 | 316 | 283 | 181 | 14 | 76 | 209 | 183 | 157 | -9 | 204 | 171 | |
| 2007 | 236 | 93 | 190 | 72 | 139 | 75 | -40 | -18 | 73 | 79 | 112 | 89 | |
| 2008 | 41 | -84 | -95 | -208 | -190 | -198 | -210 | -274 | -432 | -489 | -803 | -661 | |
| 2009 | -818 | -724 | -799 | -692 | -361 | -482 | -339 | -231 | -199 | -202 | -42 | -171 | |
| 2010 | -40 | -35 | 189 | 239 | 516 | -167 | -58 | -51 | -27 | 220 | 121 | 120 | |
| 2011 | 110 | 220 | 246 | 251 | 54 | 84 | 96 | 85 | 202 | 112 | 157 | 223 | |
| 2012 | 275 | 259 | 143 | 68 | 77(P) | 80(P) | |||||||
| P : preliminary | |||||||||||||
| Year | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | Annual |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2001 | 4.2 | 4.2 | 4.3 | 4.4 | 4.3 | 4.5 | 4.6 | 4.9 | 5.0 | 5.3 | 5.5 | 5.7 | |
| 2002 | 5.7 | 5.7 | 5.7 | 5.9 | 5.8 | 5.8 | 5.8 | 5.7 | 5.7 | 5.7 | 5.9 | 6.0 | |
| 2003 | 5.8 | 5.9 | 5.9 | 6.0 | 6.1 | 6.3 | 6.2 | 6.1 | 6.1 | 6.0 | 5.8 | 5.7 | |
| 2004 | 5.7 | 5.6 | 5.8 | 5.6 | 5.6 | 5.6 | 5.5 | 5.4 | 5.4 | 5.5 | 5.4 | 5.4 | |
| 2005 | 5.3 | 5.4 | 5.2 | 5.2 | 5.1 | 5.0 | 5.0 | 4.9 | 5.0 | 5.0 | 5.0 | 4.9 | |
| 2006 | 4.7 | 4.8 | 4.7 | 4.7 | 4.6 | 4.6 | 4.7 | 4.7 | 4.5 | 4.4 | 4.5 | 4.4 | |
| 2007 | 4.6 | 4.5 | 4.4 | 4.5 | 4.4 | 4.6 | 4.7 | 4.6 | 4.7 | 4.7 | 4.7 | 5.0 | |
| 2008 | 5.0 | 4.9 | 5.1 | 5.0 | 5.4 | 5.6 | 5.8 | 6.1 | 6.1 | 6.5 | 6.8 | 7.3 | |
| 2009 | 7.8 | 8.3 | 8.7 | 8.9 | 9.4 | 9.5 | 9.5 | 9.6 | 9.8 | 10.0 | 9.9 | 9.9 | |
| 2010 | 9.7 | 9.8 | 9.8 | 9.9 | 9.6 | 9.4 | 9.5 | 9.6 | 9.5 | 9.5 | 9.8 | 9.4 | |
| 2011 | 9.1 | 9.0 | 8.9 | 9.0 | 9.0 | 9.1 | 9.1 | 9.1 | 9.0 | 8.9 | 8.7 | 8.5 | |
| 2012 | 8.3 | 8.3 | 8.2 | 8.1 | 8.2 | 8.2 |
The point is: the 2010 elections didn't go far enough: the Democrats are playing defense in the Senate and White House. The country knows that the stimulus didn't work as claimed; is the electorate really going to blame the GOP when their policies have been stymied by the opposition? I think it all boils down to whether they think Obama will do something different in a second term than a first term; in the meanwhile, long-term unemployment hasn't improved; our national debt now exceeds the size of our economy for the only time since WWII; the credit rating bureaus have already started downgrading our debt for the first time ever; the retirement tsunami of Baby Boomers has already started, and already we have scores of cities and states dealing with chronic pension problems.
I think every voter out there knows that if they have to watch their budget during tough times, so must the government. The budgets submitted by the President and the Senate Democrats have been a joke. They haven't even proposed something as simple as a 3% spending cut across the board. We are paying hundreds of billions in interest payments--with record low interest rates.
Will voters really reelect Obama because of an executive order here, another empty promise there or attack ads on Romney? In fact, despite Obama's waves of negative ads, Romney has continued to split national head-to-head polls, with a large number of Americans whom really don't know much about him. This will change over the next 4 months.
But I've been absolutely baffled by Romney's campaign, political posturing, gaffes and stumbles. Let me be specific:
- Romney has been utterly clueless in symbolism and unforced political errors. For example, he was recently quoted questioning London's preparations for the Olympic games and in the process started a kerfuffle. I have no idea why he would even go there. Next, Romney knows that the Obama campaign is trying to stereotype him as having been born into wealth and privilege: why in the world would you have photo opps on jet skis? Multiple homes, cars, elevators for cars, etc.? Jokes about plant closings? Now, granted, Obama has stepped into it himself with the "you didn't build that" sound bite, the "spread some wealth around" moment of the 2012 campaign. (I haven't reviewed Romney's response, but I would have had a Lloyd Bentsen moment like, "Mr. President, I was there when we started Bain Capital from an initial seed investment of $X million and YY employees and no clients--and I built the business to XXX clients, YYY employees, and ZZZ millions of dollars of business; the government didn't do that: I did it with the assistance of a number of other professionals.") You should never have a contradictory message coming out of the SCOTUS ObamaCare decision, given the fact the Dems are trying to link ObamaCare to RomneyCare. A lot of this is just plain common sense--and I'm not even a politician. If you're going to get your picture taken, do it at a state fair, throw out the first pitch of a baseball game (but, for God's sake, don't let the Dems catch you singing "God Bless America" during the seventh-inning stretch), go to a Boy Scout jamboree, go deer hunting, etc.
- Romney has failed to posture himself effectively. Romney is a successful businessman, a capitalist. From a first principles perspective, he should be similar to me: a commitment to free trade and free markets, against crony relationships between business and government, for immigration. Instead, he's out there bashing China and taking a hardline on immigration which is absolutely lethal in terms of outreach to Latinos.(You would have figured that he's seen what has happened to the GOP in California over since Pete Wilson's scorched earth policy on immigration...) There are ways to criticize Obama on the issue (I've outlined some steps) without making it seem like the GOP wants to crack down on nannies, maids and gardeners or split families apart. Romney could talk about American universities training young professionals to compete against us, because they can't stay in the country after they graduate. Romney could talk about farmers unable to get migrant worker labor they need because unions block visiting worker programs.
But it goes beyond that. For instance, Romney could position himself against Obama by arguing for a more restrained foreign policy, he should contrast himself from the Bush/Obama legacy of low economic growth, government interventionist policies, foreign meddling and nation building, etc. Romney could take a position critical of the Fed--recall, Obama renominated Ben Bernanke. Romney had to notice how Ron Paul drew strong, almost fanatical support; he should trying to forge a coalition with Ron Paul supporters rather than to maneuver to the right of Rick Santorum populism.
- Romney needs a simpler, consistent message. Romney had a hard time putting away a fairly weak field in the primaries (his strongest competitors were a senator whom lost reelection by a landslide in a purple state and a former Speaker reprimanded by the Congress and with ties to the GSE's) and comes across as unprincipled. Voters' eyes are going to glaze over when he talks about a 59-point plan. He needs to wrap himself around themes like: individual responsibility, not government responsibility; Obama talks bipartisan--I deliver bipartisan; simplify taxes; the government should think before it spends; stop taxing the next generation with deficits; no more government deals for businesses and unions; etc.
Democrats and Half-Baked Policies
I think one of the most amusing consumer product categories out there are half-baked goods (pizza, pies, etc.) (as if baking for several minutes in your own oven makes it your own!) What is utterly amazing is how the 111th Congress managed to pass two bills with thousands of pages between them (ObamaCare and Dodd N. Frankenstein) and you STILL have bureaucrats pumping out regulations not in them. "Let the HHS Secretary decide this, that, and the other thing." Simply OUTRAGEOUS! Congress shouldn't be delegating SQUAT!
I have to say: does life get any better than watching a beautiful, smart woman like Maria Bartiromo put Barney Frank in his place? Be still, my beating heart... Barney probably went home crying on the shoulder of his newlywed husband...
So here's Russ Roberts of Cafe Hayek on the situation:
The entertaining part is the arguments they get into. The illuminating part is that TWO YEARS after Dodd-Frank passed, its provisions are not completely specified. Frank resents the claim that it’s not even half done, but that’s quibbling. The point is that two years after this legislation passed, its provisions remain incompletely unspecified. What the heck is that about? There is no way to measure the impact of this kind of uncertainty on the economy in the middle of a recession with any precision, but it’s not a good thing. We’re not talking about the uncertainty of what the consequences are of the legislation. We’re talking about the uncertainty over what’s in the legislation.So we wait a while to see, along with Nancy Pelosi, what's in the legislation. The key question is: how can a politician ethically vote for blank check legislation?
Political Humor
"President Obama hasn't met with his jobs council in over six months. You know the reason? They're all out looking for jobs." –Jay Leno
[They still haven't found anything for him to do after the election this November.]
Germany has opened a new hotline that lets people call in and yell curse words at strangers on the other end.
[So THAT'S why all those Germans have been calling and screaming at me in the middle of the night... I should have known better than to criticize Chancellor Merkel in my blog.]
Musical Interlude: My Favorite Groups
Blondie, "Dreaming". I can still remember driving on a San Antonio freeway at night, playing this tune full volume with the windows down.... Brilliant vocal and I love the driving percussion in the arrangement. One of my two favorite Blondie tunes (the other being "Atomic")
