Category Archives: Economy

Little Boxes

This economic prediction is from Rawles on SurvivalBlog this morning:

I’ve recently been asked by several blog readers and consulting clients about my predictions for the economy for the next few years. Here they are, in a nutshell: The US economy will remain weak for for at least five years. Both the commercial and residential real estate markets are unlikely to recover before 2018, especially as interest rates begin to increase. Noticeable inflation should begin around the Spring of 2011 and will become uncomfortably high by 2012. If the announced Federal income tax and capital gains tax increases do indeed go into effect, they will stifle the economy for the foreseeable future. Continued financial instability in the periphery of the EU will continue to keep the Euro weak versus the Dollar, but in the end, both currencies are doomed. Global credit market chaos will probably continue for several more years, as will the Mother of All Bailouts (MOAB) here in the United States. I’d say that there is a 25% chance of a Dollar Panic and devaluation in the next four years, and a 5% chance of a hyperinflationary Dollar Collapse. But regardless, some inflation is coming. Its severity is difficult to predict. The bull market in precious metals is nowhere near its end. I still predict that spot price of silver will eventually exceed $50 per ounce.

I think it’s pretty close to what I would predict. When he says “…in the end, both currencies are doomed”, while probably true, could be a decades away. I think it’s interesting he’s picking 2018 as the earliest real estate recovery date when I picked close to the same thing last night (I was a little more optimistic, thinking 2015). The inflation prediction is his earliest prediction, so I’ll be watching for his accuracy.

Here’s another “I’m not an idiot” moment. Richard Fernandez wrote this yesterday:

But Barone implies that for all the apparent flux one thing remains constant: it’s a brake and throttle world. The liberals hit the throttle and the Republicans sometimes step on the brakes. Republicans haven’t noticed the steering wheel.

Yeah, that’s just about right, IMO. This ties in with the above prediction. That pessimism is born out of not believing that either party will do anything more than delay the inevitable. People tend to operate in their own self-interest, and a vast majority of politicians’ self-interest is diametrically opposed to the country’s self-interest. And as a rule, the longer they are “serving”, the more that’s true. Later he makes a comment that’s rather apropos to a conversation I had with my wife last night:

It may take more than hard times to make a political paradigm shift thinkable.

Or planting fruit trees, for that matter. How many people just can’t imagine growing their own food? All people create their own boxes of their minds that can be very difficult to break out of. Some worse that others, of course. Limits in thinking equal limits in action, so when an action is required that requires you to think outside your little box, you freeze.

Guns and the Economy

I don’t have a lot of time for writing today, but before I didn’t have time, I had a bit for reading. So, I’m passing along two columns I read this morning that are both pretty interesting. The first is by Walter Russell Mead about the top 10 things we’ve learned from the financial crisis. It’s good, and I agree with almost all of it. We certainly do live in interesting times.

The world economy is like a person with a bad stomach flu; that horrible sick feeling keeps coming back. In 2008 it was mortgage-backed bonds and the failure of Lehman Brothers; last year it was the worst recession since the 1930s; this year it’s the European financial crisis. We still don’t know where this is going; there is plenty of good news out there. The National Association of Business Economists is upgrading its growth forecast for the US in 2010; China remains strong; the IMF is upgrading its growth forecasts worldwide. On the other hand, some of the world’s smartest investors are buying gold like there was no tomorrow, there is talk about a new global meltdown, and the world’s financial markets seem ready to plunge on the slightest whiff of bad news.

The second is a piece on Pajamas Media pointing out that the Mexican President’s pants are on fire. One thing I’ve learned through my study of history: always be very scared when politicians want to take away the citizen’s guns. It all comes down to power and money.

President Calderon’s assertion that Mexico has seized around 75,000 guns and assault weapons in the last three years — and that more than 80 percent of them came from the United States — is a bald-faced lie. It simply is not remotely connected to the truth.

What Greece Means in the Bigger Picture

I haven’t had much time for long post lately, and today’s not an exception. Blogging is something that definitely comes in waves in my life. Anyway, today’s post at the Belmont Club was too good to pass up linking to and doing a quick cut-and-paste. He’s talking about what the Greek melt down means to Western social democracies. I’m 100% on board with his analysis. The best case scenario right now is a painful — but controlled — realignment of government priorities that will make a lot of people upset. The worse case scenario swerves into a conversation that most people don’t want to have.

But Portugal and Spain are suspect — as well as many of the larger EU economies too. Their problems can be fixed to be sure. But they cannot be fixed by any kind of bridging loan, “put” or ’shock and awe’ intervention. None of that will work in the long run. However things are stabilized in the short term, eventually a scaling down of the welfare state — and indeed the size of the Western state itself — will be necessary. There’s simply not enough money to sustain it. A wave of change, but not the kind of change that President Obama imagined, is following right behind the financial tsunamis. All of his ill-timed “investments”, like bloated Federal Health care, immigration “reform”, and cap-and-trade have come at a time when they simply can’t be borne. Institutions like featherbedded unions, monopolies and obsolete gatekeepers should view recent events in the same way that dinosaurs who looked up at an enormous descending meteor should. The enormous tower of quangos, EU commissions, massive agencies, vast entitlements is trembling beneath that most quotidian of assaults: lack of supply, “like a cut flower in a vase; fair to see yet doomed to die.”

So far our leaders — including most on the conservative side of the aisle — have shown absolutely no desire to address these issues. I don’t think they will unless they’re forced, either. There’s no way around it: in the end, it means them giving up a huge chunk of power. We haven’t had a politician like that in high office since George Washington.

Slow Growth Forecasted

James Pethokoukis has an article at Reuters talking about a new economic paper released from Northwestern University economist Robert Gordon forecasting very slow growth in the United States over the next 20 years. This is heavily impacted by current fiscal policies and affects future fiscal policies. Here’s the key paragraphs:

America faced a similar turning point a generation ago. During the Jimmy Carter years, the Malthusian, Limits to Growth crowd argued that natural-resource constraints meant Americans would have to lower their economic expectations and accept economic stagnation — or worse. Carter more or less accepted an end to American Exceptionalism, but the 1980 presidential election showed few of his countrymen did. They chose growth economics and the economy grew.

Now they face another choice. Preserve wealth, redistribute wealth or create wealth. Hopefully, President Barack Obama will choose door #3. Investing more in basic research (not just healthcare) would be a start, as would slashing the corporate tax rate. A new consumption tax would be better for growth, but only if it replaced the current wage and investment income taxes. Real entitlement reform would help avoid the Reinhart-Rogoff scenario. The choices made during the next few years could the difference between America in Decline or the American (21st) Century.

Remember the wonderful projections of deficits ranging between 500 billion and 1.2 trillion dollars a year over the next 10 years? Bad news: that assumes much more robust growth rates, resulting in a lot more tax dollars coming in. If Robert Gordon is on the right track, the graph below is a overwhelmingly optimistic projection.

Whoa.

Don’t Give Up

Time to get political again. That’s really why I have this blog, after all; this is where I feel free to speak my mind and if it annoys someone out there, bummer. For those with blood pressure issues, I have my family blog that’s entirely safe from such things. Today though, on this blog, I’m linking to this spectacular entry by Dr. Zero over at Hot Air Blog. It’s called “A Word to the Weary“, and it basically says, yeah, things are bad, but don’t give up. Keep fighting. It’s a scary, wonderful, and inspiring post. It’s not a rah-rah Republican piece, but centered upon freedom. The start:

I get a lot of email from people who ask if the final degeneration from capitalism to collectivism is now inevitable. Entitlements are never repealed, after all, and we just got saddled with a back-breaking entitlement, piled atop a national debt that was already crushing us. It seems like it would take a miracle just to undo the damage Barack Obama has done in a single year… and that would just get us back to where George Bush left us. Dependency, unemployment, economic contraction, and socialist politics are a perpetual-motion engine of national decline.

A couple points I’d like to make. First, don’t ever mistake this: neither party can be absolutely trusted with your life, happiness, and freedom. Keep them honest and be willing to turn on them in a heartbeat if you catch them betraying their promises. Second, I have no idea how bad or chaotic these political and financial upheavals are going to be, but I am fairly certain that the past few years represents just the tip of the iceberg. Anyone with a lick of sense sees our national debt and projected deficits over the next decade and can see that.

When that systemic crash does come — and it will — how bad and painful it will be is being affected by our actions today in a very real way. It can be looked at as a sliding scale. The more dependent the citizenry are upon the machine of government, the more painful the crash will be. The more independent they are, the softer the transition will be.

One Geeky Correction

Over at the Belmont Club, Richard Fernandez writes:

Congressman Paul Ryan has had considerable success lately explaining the main problem with health care — and with “social democracy” — in general: it’s unsustainable. It’s an old message which has until recently taken a back seat to the idea that the welfare state was the wave of the future. OpenLeft argued that the hidden message of Star Trek was that in the future humanity would establish a socialist paradise. “The most familiar utopian socialist society would be that of the United Federation of Planets in the popular television series Star Trek – particularly that depicted in The Next Generation. There is no money, no want, no poverty, no crime, no disease or ignorance in human society; everyone works for the advancement of all humanity — as well as the rest of the Federation.”

One correction: Star Trek isn’t a socialist paradise. Do you ever about taxes? I believe the idea is that through amazing (TECH THE TECH) advances, goods such as food, clothes, housing, transportation, and even advanced tech like those cool iPads they all carry have prices approaching zero. So, the only reason one would work are 1) for personal satisfaction of some sort, or 2) to acquire whatever scarce goods are still available, such as collector’s items of something or services that require human contact. I can think of all sorts of ways a person may get those still-scarce items without “money”. But it’s not socialist per se, but just a hyper abundant society. Government doesn’t tax (no money!) and doesn’t own the means to production, as I’ve seen episodes where people have their own replicators. That’s about as individual of means of production as you’re going to get.

Bob’s Red Mill is Now Employee Owned

Wow. I love Bob’s Red Mill. My wife and I shop at the company store every chance we get. They sell great quality grains, legumes, among other types of food, and in bulk, if you want it. I just had some of their 13 bean soup mix on Ash Wednesday, actually. The employees there have always been top notch and very helpful to us. All this is a backdrop for the bombshell that was dropped today: Bob Moore — the founder and owner of the company — is giving the entire works to his employees. Considering they only have 209 employees, this is a big, big deal:

“This is Bob taking care of us,” said Lori Sobelson, who helps run the business’ retail operation. “He expects a lot out of us, but really gives us the world in return.” Moore declined to say how much he thinks the company is worth. In 2004, however, one business publication estimated that year’s revenues at more than $24 million. A company news release issued this week stated that Bob’s Red Mill has chalked up an annual growth rate of between 20 percent to 30 percent every year since.

Wow. As an employee of a privately-held company, you really can’t expect this. You make an agreement to do your job at the best of your ability for an agreed upon package, mostly being salary. No complaints there, but this is pretty much a dream for these workers. Instead of only the executives getting the package, they’re all getting it. Neat.

We’ll find out now, I guess, how much of their success had to do with Bob Moore himself, and his company can keep succeeding so wildly at what they do. I know I’ll keep spending my cash there (from another privately held company, by the way).

Here’s a video about it on ABC News that, unfortunately, I’m unable to embed.

Obama, Hayek vs. Keynes, and Of Course, Rap

When the first two stimulus packages were passed, many citizens were nodding their heads, saying to themselves it made sense. At the same time, most of political establishment did the same nodding, egging on the spending. It makes sense, right? Private spending is down, so the Federal Government spends big to cover at least some of the gap, therefore stimulating more spending? Not so fast, though. It’s actually not that obvious, and is hardly settled economic theory. It’s an old argument, too, going back to the first half of the 20th century, notably as a disagreement between the theories of John Maynard Keynes and Friedrich Von Hayek.

So, in the dawn of the second decade of the 21st century, how does one get caught up on these theories? YouTube, of course. A RAP video on YouTube.

Back? Good. Now, two years after the first stimulus under GW Bush, and a year after a much larger version under Obama, how’s the economy going? But don’t worry: they’re getting ready to pass a third one, if they can find the votes (watch for it under the term “jobs bill”). Does this invalidate Keynes’ theories? Maybe, but there’s a good argument to be made that Obama isn’t really following his proscriptions anyway. Money magazine has a great interview laying out this idea.

My opinion is this: as soon as Keynes came out with this spend big theory, politicians everywhere danced, laughed, and danced a bit more. This gave them a scientific excuse to borrow money that we don’t have to spend on pet projects, on what contributors would like pumped up, and on buying votes from eager constituents. It was a license to spend, and spend big, all under the cover of what the experts say should be done. This goes for both parties, so it’s not a partisan thing. So yeah, I’m a big fan of Hayek.

I’ll end with this: it can’t go on forever. It might go on for a long, long time yet, but you can’t keep increasing the national debt at rates like this and not have to pay a terrible price someday.

Ruralpolitans?

I’m not sure how I feel about that particular made up word. It sounds like some ice cream containing hay. Anyway, this piece on the Wall Street Journal is as interesting as it is true.

Before his family moved to rural Clatskanie, Ore., Mr. Wiles says he was a classic “urban liberal” dweller, frequenting microbreweries, coffee shops and bookstores. Now his family lives on five acres where, in addition to horses, they also own goats and turkeys, among other animals.

He and his wife run an employment-services company for people with disabilities. One travels 60 miles to Portland several times a week for business; otherwise, they work from home. Mr. Wiles has learned to operate a compact tractor and built a horse shed, and he has acquired several guns. “Look, we’re not survivalists and storing powdered milk or anything like that, but if the s—- hits the fan, I can grow all the food I want and take care of my family,” he says. “It’s liberating.”

Yup. And this sort of view point shouldn’t be looked upon as strange or alarming. A guy wanting to take care of his family by setting up supplemental and backup systems of support, such as food production. This is a good thing, for both that family and for the country. Still, I think his comment is pretty funny. Oh my! You’re one of those powdered milk storing survivalists! Apparently the amount of powdered dairy one has is inversely proportionate to their sanity level.

John Stossel on Health Care Reform

John Stossel nails it talking yesterday on Reason Online about health care reform. This is definitely one of those “read it all” pieces. Here’s the start, though, as a teaser:

It’s crazy for a group of mere mortals to try to design 15 percent of the U.S. economy. It’s even crazier to do it by August.

Yet that is what some members of Congress presume to do. They intend, as the New York Times puts it, “to reinvent the nation’s health care system.”

Well, John, it’s only crazy if you think it’s about improving efficiency. There are three reasons why this health care bill is being pushed: the reason for moderates, the reason for the true believers, and the real reason.

For the moderates, it’s being sold as a way to “fix” the system by making it more efficient and saving tons of money in the process for “the American taxpayer”. This is demonstratively false, and really, an outright lie. The reason why the polls keep reversing against Obama is because people are figuring this out.

For the true believers, it’s being sold as making the system more “fair”. This is the reason for Obama’s conference call with the lefty bloggers out there, reassuring them that no matter what he says, it’s going to be a socialist system (in so many words). This is a lie too, but more insidious. The upper class in Britain and Canada can still get better health care than the working rabble, make no mistake. The price for ensuring that the poorest get free health care is that the middle class majority get less quality and less choice. Fair? No, not really, depending on your point of view.

So, what’s the real reason? Power. Pure, naked, narcotic-like corrupting power. To gain control of 15% of the national economy in one fell swoop is a power grab not seen since the Great Depression. If the President succeeds in getting this passed, it’ll make the working rabble that much more beholden to the Government for yet another basic, needed service, and make it that much easier for Democrats to get elected. How many large scale government programs in the United States have ever been repealed? Oh yeah, zero.