Nearly all men can stand adversity,
but if you want to test a man's character,
give him power.
Abraham Lincoln
Want To Generate Your Own Fake US EPA Identity?
 |
| Lisa "Richard Windsor" Jackson courtesy of EPA Fake Identity Creator |
It appears the Justice Department's version of redaction and transparency is to produce 2100 of 3000 emails, none of which show Richard Windsor's comments, just Internet-copied content.
PS I think I remember Ralph Vincent from my 1993 Oracle DBA subcontractor days at the Chicago regional EPA labs. I believe I mentioned that the network team physically doing backups of the database never tested their backup tests but relied on software feedback verifying the backup. I repeatedly asked the group to do test restores, to no avail. An EPA lab software vendor came in to do an upgrade and ran into technical problems; he asked me to revert to the pre-install database, which is when the network group discovered their backup copies were unusable. Expletive deleted; welcome to my world...No doubt Ralph advanced in his EPA career (in accordance with the Peter Principle) to the position of backing up Richard Windsor's email...
Factoid of the Day:
Who Owns the Most US Debt?
From CNS:
- The Fed's holdings of U.S. government debt have increased by 257 percent since President Barack Obama was first inaugurated on Jan. 20, 2009, and the Fed is currently the single largest holder of U.S. government debt: $1,696,691,000,000 as of the close of business on Wednesda. The Fed has purchased during Obama's presidency 23 percent of all the new publicly held [vs. government-held, e.g., entitlement and pension reserves] debt the Treasury has issued during that time.
- As of the end of November, according to the U.S. Treasury, entities in Mainland China owned about $1,170,100,000,000 in U.S. government debt, making China the largest foreign holder of U.S. government debt.
We have seen the Japanese whom have basically have financed their own debt. This comes from the depth of the global recession in 2009, but it makes the general point:
From 1985 to the end of 1989, the chart for the Nikkei 225 really went parabolic, trading from around 10,000 to an unbelievable 38,915.87 in just a few short years. 20 years later, the Nikkei 225 is currently trading at 8,755.26. This is around 22% of what the index was trading at in the late 1980s.The point I'm trying to make here is opportunity costs: instead of yen being invested in the real economy, they were vested in wild Keynesian spending binges (e.g., high speed rail). The "new" Japanese PM, Shinzo Abe is resorting to the fiat currency printing presses by jawboning the BOJ; the idea is to devalue the yen, helping Japanese exports. (The US has no moral authority to complain since the Fed fired the opening shots of the currency wars.) I will simply point out there is a real cost to crony bank manipulations--holders of debt and savers are affected, not to mention imported resources.
Don's argument is more of a reductio ad absurdum, pretty much the broken window fallacy: if government spending is a free lunch, why stop at any level? Why not simply match private sector income, for instance? There is a cost--on higher debt service costs to future generations.They have to service the debt, and that can crowd out funding for operational programs.
The Feds: Changing the Rules in the Middle of the Game
Time for Bottom-Up Government
Tomato Protectionism
Whenever you hear allegations of dumping, you will find a protectionist/mercantilist behind it. You name it--tires, steel, tomatoes. Bottom line: imports increase supplies of a good, which generally translates into lower prices--good for the consumer, not for domestic producers whom lose profit/margin. The producers don't want to admit they're worried about profits at the expense of consumers. The best defense is a good offense; and so they attack free trade by arguing foreigners aren't playing by the rules.
One of the biggest canards is dumping, i.e., the trader is selling his goods below cost to capture a foreign market.
Flash forward (HT Carpe Diem). The US in the past negotiated a price floor agreement on tomatoes in an agreement with Mexico, which exempts Mexico from adverse trade sanctions. Florida growers are upset that consumers prefer the better-tasting Mexican produce, increasing Mexican market share. The crony growers have the sympathetic ear of the Obama Administration; they want the agreement to be set aside and for the Feds to slap a punitive tariff on Mexican produce (which, of course, would spark a trade war on American food exports to Mexico).
Let me make myself clear: I do think we should do away with price floors. I have no problem with Mexican growers being able to offer their produce for as low a price as they wish. It makes no business sense to sell at a loss on a sustained basis. But if Florida grower ripening techniques yield a blander tomato, they should market a better tasting tomato. Higher tariffs? HELL, NO! Remember my favorite Bastiat quote (acting in the best interests of the consumer).
Musical Interlude: My Favorite Group
The Cars, "You Might Think"
