The world is moving so fast these days
that the man who says it can't be done
is generally interrupted by someone doing it.
Harry Emerson Fosdick
Image of the Day
One year's worth of new federal regulations; how would we ever cope without bureaucrats telling us what to do, even capping how many people can swim with a dolphin? "The ratio of human participants to cetaceans shall not exceed 3:1."
 |
| Courtesy of an investment newsletter publisher |
Re: Who will succeed Fed Reserve Chair Bernanke? The truth about [Christina Romer] the former chair of Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers is that she has made more predictions that were wrong in her career than a deaf and blind weatherman forecasting from a windowless studio. - Shah Gilani
[Incidentally, I'm intrigued by Gilani's admittedly no-chance suggestion of David Stockman. I could go with Stockman or any of a number of free market economists, like Steve Horwitz. Reading between the lines, like this blog has predicted, Gilano seems to regard Janet Yellen as Obama's obvious choice. His assessment: "She’s a mild-mannered bank boot licker who never met a printing press she didn’t know how to operate." IPPON!]
Bernanke, PCE and the Markets
I'm still not sure what was behind Bernanke's suggestion that the Fed might taper off asset purchases (for the record, I oppose ZIRP and Fed intervention in the open markets)--might it be his way of encouraging investors to reallocate part of their bond holdings to equities?, but I'm convinced that he's bluffing. Bernanke, like Obama, is predictable; as I pointed out, in a recent post, Bernanke recoils at deflation; his main area of study has been the Great Depression. At each phase of Fed asset buying, we've seen changes in inflation statistics (I'm not going to quibble here about food and energy exclusions; I'm trying to look at things from Bernanke's point of view.) I think in part we've seen a softening in the resources market because China has slowed relevant imports due to an economic slowdown. In any event, PCE data is at the lowest (or trivially above) rate since they've kept records. Poor Ben; as much as he's pumped money into the economy, it's like trying to revive a corpse. No wonder he's been going apeshit over sequester. AEI's Pethokoukis, not exactly a sound money enthusiast (he seems to lean to the market monetarist perspective in other posts), suggests that instead of buying assets, the Fed should do a Helicopter Ben money drop, as in the form of a Fed-financed tax cut. Wow, nothing would inspire confidence in the dollar like directly monetizing the federal budget... (Yes, I'm being sarcastic.)
 |
| Courtesy of Seeking Alpha |
 |
| I do disagree with an occasional item, e.g., enabling "gay marriage" Courtesy of John Stossel |
There are parts of this bill I strongly disagree with: the E-Verify nonsense and the trivial working visa caps. I believe that we need to radically expand immigration, moving towards an ideal of open immigration. I'm disappointed in not seeing some of my favorite more Tea Party senators join in (Rand Paul, Lee, Cruz, and Johnson), although some of my favorites did (Kirk, Flake). Some of the senators had a principled objection to the Gang of 8 negotiated compromise which largely excluded input from the rest of the Senate. I think Rand Paul is posturing for 2016 by focusing on the southern border vulnerabilities; however, Paul, Lee et al. do not share an anti-immigrant perspective. Marco Rubio has taken a lot of hits since the infamous bottled water kerfuffle. His participation in the Gang of 8 has aroused the ire of the "anti-amnesty" forces, to the point that there is now talk of contesting his renomination for the Senate in 2016. Although the bill is flawed in many ways as I briefly mentioned at the start, it improves on the status quo.
Post-DOMA Ruling: Let's Eliminate the Federal Marital Benefit Breaks
Let's not forget the abysmal SCOTUS rulings in part were an attempt by gays to capture federal goodies; in part, these go back to more traditional settings where mothers stayed at home to raise kids, which affects household income, retirement planning etc. This, of course, is irrelevant to gay couples unless they result to extraordinary means (sperm banks, surrogates, etc.) and/or liberal adoption policies. (I strongly endorse lowering/simplifying taxes; I also dislike social engineering through tax or social policies.) Consider this relevant interview excerpt from LifeSiteNews:
“The important philosophical question is, what were these benefits intended for? Why do they exist?” Dr. Allan F. Carlson, president of the The Howard Center, told LifeSiteNews.com.
The federal government provides federal economic incentives for marriage – such as tax exemptions and Social Security survivors benefits – in order to encourage the institution as “a place for children to be born and raised and nurtured.”
Carlson suggested that since marriage has now been “stripped of its child-centered focus” by the legalization of homosexual unions, which are always naturally sterile, “maybe it’s time to abandon marriage as an important category for benefits and simply focus on giving benefits to parents, people with children.”
“If [federal incentives] are no longer fulfilling the proper function, which was encouraging the promotion of children, it’s possible that some of these benefits should no longer exist, perhaps,” Carlson told LifeSiteNews. “I think it’s time to rethink the whole concept of benefits in this regard.”
Carlson suggested “Instead of tying benefits to marriage,” the federal government might “tie them to the presence of children in the home. To me, that’s a much more important thing.”Going Beyond Williams, Cain, Sowell and Thomas:
Other Conservatives of Color
A Congressman's Moving Tribute to His Hero Father
In the Aftermath of Gay Appreciation Day at SCOTUS, Celebrating Real Betrothal
I still haven't met the right girl, but others have...
Political Cartoon
 |
| Courtesy of Glenn Foden and Townhall |
The Supreme Court has overturned the Defense of Marriage Act. How about that? We don't need a Defense of Marriage Act. What we need in this country is a marriage cap. You're allowed three, and after that, you're done. - Jay Leno
[Come on, Jay; what guy can afford to get married 4 times in California?]
In New York, the new front-runner in the New York City mayor's race is Anthony Weiner. Some analysts say it's due to name recognition. Actually, I think a few people recognize more than just his name. - Conan O'Brien
[Conan, no hitting below the belt!]
Musical Interlude: My Favorite Group Redux
The Beatles, "Twist and Shout". Lennon shows off his decent pipes in one of the few Beatles' remakes that charted. Oddly, I didn't know up-and-coming producer Phil Spector was the first to cover Bert Berns' song, and Berns hated the arrangement; after the Top Notes' effort (third video) flopped on the hit charts, Berns produced the Isley Brothers' monster hit version (second video), and obviously the Beatles were influenced by the Isleys.
