If you only have a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail.
Abraham Maslow
Earlier One-Off Post: Nous Sommes Charlie: You Can Count Me Out, In
Image of the Day
 |
| Via We the People |
SCOTUS Agrees To Review Four Cases Upholding Traditional Marriage Cases: Thumbs DOWN!
Okay, I'm not a lawyer, but this outcome is so obvious that you can phone it in. Look, before the recent Supreme Court ruling, over 30 states had constitutionally reaffirmed traditional marriage; today, at least a plurality of those states have had their laws vacated by federal court fiat, despite Kennedy's opinion recognizing traditional state regulation of marriage. More important, SCOTUS has refused appeals from those states essentially sustaining lower court reversals. This is troubling on several scores, one of them being I think it takes just 4 justices to pick up an appeal--which one might expect from Kennedy and/or the original 4 dissenting justices. I can only speculate--it could be Kennedy telegraphed a stronger ruling this time around.
This means that the fact that SCOTUS is picking up the cases affirming traditional marriage law is not a good thing. Refusing to hear the cases would have affirmed state sovereignty (plus an incoherent status quo where some states were more equal than others in state sovereignty). Agreeing to hear the cases seems to signal an almost certain sweeping reversal.
I realize the hearing is weeks away, but for me, there are 2 major questions: (1) what argument will carry the day, and (2) will the 4 justices capitulate to give a sweeping "right to marry" decision so-called moral authority of a unanimous decision? Let me give a guarded guess the answer to the second question is no; I don't see, for example, how Justice Thomas would validate federal reversals of over 30 state referendums; it would all but nullify the tenth amendment. The first question is harder to answer, but I expect just like Kennedy ignored the California Proposition 8 vote, he'll accept the recent reversals as a fait accompli and then argue a fourteenth amendment argument, saying the minority holdout states are discriminating against gay couples from out of the majority of other states
The Fed: ZIRP and/or More QE?
Geoffrey Pike has an interesting opinion, confirming the opinions of others, including myself, that the Fed will not follow through on hinted lifting of ZIRP policy. There's one interesting distinctly Austrian argument I haven't seen elsewhere, at least in my reading to date, that one example of malinvestment under the Fed ZIRP regime is all the money thrown at high-cost oil shale plays, which have been devastated by a rare 40% correction in the oil market; as of the current date, I'm only aware of a few bankruptcies, and I know a number of plays did hedge against price declines; the real story is who is backing those hedges and whether they controlled for their own risks.
Pike points out a soft global economy has a distinct deflationary whiff to it. He notes that more robust growth should be showing higher wage growth, but in fact wage growth isn't keeping pace with inflation. Now let us recall that if there's one bugaboo central bankers fear, it's deflation. We actually showed weak retail numbers last month, the Fed finds its undershooting its inflation targets, and a "strong" dollar means deflationary pressures from competing imports. I suspect we'll see softer exporter profits. At some point, the Fed will realize the reality of an interest rate increase not only risks putting the current fragile recovery at risk for recession but will exacerbate deflationary pressures. As the ECB looks to expand its own QE, the Fed will feel the need to temper deflation due to a strong dollar; part of that could be deferring a change in ZIRP, which should hit the dollar assuming a rate increase is baked into the appreciating dollar. With an increasingly volatile stock market given minor corrections in October and earlier this month and possible continuing pain in the energy market starting to hit the greater economy, I suspect that another round of QE will be used to prop up asset prices and mitigate the dollar's comparable strength.
Facebook Corner
(Learn Liberty). Deport this video? Watch and tell us what you think.
This post just might get deleted as well as Ryan Brebner.
Explain how adding " More" people in creates more jobs?
Local people are still living on " unemployment money".
Those who are not anymore most likely got dropped off because they could not collect anymore.
Far as more jobs... explain to me why 3 of Phoenix Arizona largest indoor malls have wings of emptiness. So much it looks like a ghost town in those malls.
Where are those 300,000 plus jobs? Guess not there.
I have seen more places shut down lately than go up.
So tell me how adding more people who will work for damn near nothing motivates the local to find a job.
Mind you there are not many " full time" jobs out there. Part time sure, full time.... very few.
These part time jobs don't pay the bills that anyone has.
How about the increase people on the street holding signs saying " Homeless, anything you can spare will help" or " Homeless and a Vet, need help".
There is damn near 4 on every corner and street. Even homeless people fighting out on the street.
Until you people go outside the internet and look at the real world outside your home. You can see there is a large local problem. Beisdes open immigration just insults those who came here legally, went thru the green card system and are proud of themselves for it
We've had a perverse restrictionist immigration system since the 1920's. Stop the irrational scapegoating of immigrants (including "illegal"); our economic problems are caused by intrusive government, including a $1.8T regulatory regime. Immigrants, being younger and more mobile, are attracted by job or entrepreneurial opportunities, not by a social welfare net, which in fact isn't available for newly naturalized citizens (never mind undocumented aliens). Evidence clearly shows immigration tied to a more robust economy, not by high social expenditures (e.g., reverse migration during the Great Recession). The economic literature is overwhelmingly clear about the win-win effects of liberalized immigration, and Dr. Powell is spot on.
This is an absolutely absurd commentary. The Muslim religion has no hierarchical structure like, say, the Catholic Church. Do we Catholics embrace the excesses of the Crusades, the Inquisition, the European religious wars, the sectarian strife of Northern Ireland? Do Christians everywhere similarly share responsibility for radical sects like Jim Jones? The vast majority of Muslims are peace-loving and reject the violence of fundamentalist sects.
(Mises Institute). The Swiss franc was pegged to the euro in 2011, but after years of easy money in the eurozone, the Swiss have bailed in an effort to save the franc from even more inflation that's expected from the Europen Central Bank... http://mises.org/library/switzerland-frees-swiss-franc
Why Peg the Franc to the Euro?
The problem, of course, is that the exporters are only part of the economy--and you lose control over your monetary policy. Consumers and imports (including resources and components for manufacturers), never mind global investors looking for a stable currency, benefit from a sound money policy. Of course, as the other commenter implies, there are ways for exporters to hedge currency risk, and I see monetary manipulations like currency pegs as an implicit subsidy to the exporter side of the economy. Currency "beggar-thy-neighbor" wars are vicious cycles. I think the Swiss saw that the ECB is committed to the madness of ZIRP and quantitative easing with irredeemable fiat currency, and given the steep overhead of European debt and a tepid regional economy, it was time for Switzerland to cut its ECB anchor before its own economy sinks with it.
(IPI). There's a better way to fund roads and bridges than more pain at the pump, from The Wall Street Journal.
One of the best pieces I've seen on the issue and spot on.The real reason the highway trust fund is in trouble (besides federal rules dictating above market wages, the result of corrupt crony unionism) is it's being used by corrupt political whores as a slush fund for non-road earmarks. We need to devolve taxing and spending authority to the state level, and I further point out at the state level, we need to look at at least partial privatization and migrating to a mileage-based/tolling mechanism, which is fairer given the regressive nature of fuel tax on consumers with less fuel-efficient vehicles: why should a yuppie driving a tax-advantaged Tesla pay next to nothing for his fair share of highway costs?
(National Review). The problem and solution reside with the people of the Islamic religion themselves.
We need to stop engaging in fearmongering; with an $18T deficit and over $90T in unfunded liabilities, we cannot afford to be the world's policeman; we cannot chew up men and tax money doing $1T nationbuildings around the world. Contrary to Kudlow's nonsense, Bobby Jindal's rhetoric is no different the dime-a-dozen predictable neo-cons', no better than the failed McCain and Romney campaigns. I had high hopes for Jindal, at least on domestic policy, but he shows no recognition of lessons learned over the past two failed administrations and of the fact that the GOP needs to expand its base.
Political Cartoon
 |
| Courtesy of Gary Varvel via Townhall |
Musical Interlude: My Favorite Vocalists
Céline Dion, "It's All Coming Back To Me Now". My second favorite performance from Céline; I'm also a big Meat Loaf/Steinman fan. I briefly lived in the St. Louis area in 1996, and I remember driving at night with the windows down blasting this tune at full volume.
