Krauthammer on Obama


[Skip to the end]

Thanks, the press is starting to turn.

Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.

The Fierce Urgency of Pork

by Charles Krauthammer

Feb 6 (Washington Post) — “A failure to act, and act now, will turn crisis into a catastrophe.”

— President Obama, Feb. 4.

Catastrophe, mind you. So much for the president who in his inaugural address two weeks earlier declared “we have chosen hope over fear.” Until, that is, you need fear to pass a bill.

And so much for the promise to banish the money changers and influence peddlers from the temple. An ostentatious executive order banning lobbyists was immediately followed by the nomination of at least a dozen current or former lobbyists to high position. Followed by a Treasury secretary who allegedly couldn’t understand the payroll tax provisions in his 1040. Followed by Tom Daschle, who had to fall on his sword according to the new Washington rule that no Cabinet can have more than one tax delinquent.

The Daschle affair was more serious because his offense involved more than taxes. As Michael Kinsley once observed, in Washington the real scandal isn’t what’s illegal, but what’s legal. Not paying taxes is one thing. But what made this case intolerable was the perfectly legal dealings that amassed Daschle $5.2 million in just two years.

He’d been getting $1 million per year from a law firm. But he’s not a lawyer, nor a registered lobbyist. You don’t get paid this kind of money to instruct partners on the Senate markup process. You get it for picking up the phone and peddling influence.

At least Tim Geithner, the tax-challenged Treasury secretary, had been working for years as a humble international civil servant earning non-stratospheric wages. Daschle, who had made another cool million a year (plus chauffeur and Caddy) for unspecified services to a pal’s private equity firm, represented everything Obama said he’d come to Washington to upend.

And yet more damaging to Obama’s image than all the hypocrisies in the appointment process is his signature bill: the stimulus package. He inexplicably delegated the writing to Nancy Pelosi and the barons of the House. The product, which inevitably carries Obama’s name, was not just bad, not just flawed, but a legislative abomination.

It’s not just pages and pages of special-interest tax breaks, giveaways and protections, one of which would set off a ruinous Smoot-Hawley trade war. It’s not just the waste, such as the $88.6 million for new construction for Milwaukee Public Schools, which, reports the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, have shrinking enrollment, 15 vacant schools and, quite logically, no plans for new construction.

It’s the essential fraud of rushing through a bill in which the normal rules (committee hearings, finding revenue to pay for the programs) are suspended on the grounds that a national emergency requires an immediate job-creating stimulus — and then throwing into it hundreds of billions that have nothing to do with stimulus, that Congress’s own budget office says won’t be spent until 2011 and beyond, and that are little more than the back-scratching, special-interest, lobby-driven parochialism that Obama came to Washington to abolish. He said.

Not just to abolish but to create something new — a new politics where the moneyed pork-barreling and corrupt logrolling of the past would give way to a bottom-up, grass-roots participatory democracy. That is what made Obama so dazzling and new. Turns out the “fierce urgency of now” includes $150 million for livestock (and honeybee and farm-raised fish) insurance.

The Age of Obama begins with perhaps the greatest frenzy of old-politics influence peddling ever seen in Washington. By the time the stimulus bill reached the Senate, reports the Wall Street Journal, pharmaceutical and high-tech companies were lobbying furiously for a new plan to repatriate overseas profits that would yield major tax savings. California wine growers and Florida citrus producers were fighting to change a single phrase in one provision. Substituting “planted” for “ready to market” would mean a windfall garnered from a new “bonus depreciation” incentive.

After Obama’s miraculous 2008 presidential campaign, it was clear that at some point the magical mystery tour would have to end. The nation would rub its eyes and begin to emerge from its reverie. The hallucinatory Obama would give way to the mere mortal. The great ethical transformations promised would be seen as a fairy tale that all presidents tell — and that this president told better than anyone.

I thought the awakening would take six months. It took two and a half weeks.


[top]

Obama in no rush for fiscal package?


[Skip to the end]

Obama Has No Timetable for Stimulus Package

by Steve Leisman

President-elect Barack Obama does not have a timetable to develop and pass an economic stimulus package, according to one of his aides on the transition team.

Still, Obama wants to get a plan in place as soon as possible given the deteriorating economy, this person said.

Wait until the December unemployment report comes out…

However, it is important to get the stimulus plan right in order to get the maximum impact from the effort.

What’s that all about? Lower multiple fiscal adjustments just mean you can do more of them.

It’s about aggregate demand, not governments ability to pay.

Previously, there had been talk of a Jan. 20 deadline for passage of an economic plan. But this is looking increasingly unlikely.

Wonderful…


[top]

Obama package smaller than expected


[Skip to the end]

Obama team dismisses reports of trillion dollar stimulus

ByJessica Yellin

(CNN) – An Obama transition official says reports that the president-elect will release a stimulus plan with a trillion-dollar price tag are overblown, and that the actual figure being discussed is far smaller.

Some outside economists have pushed the trillion-dollar figure. One recent report suggested the transition team was working with an $850 billion plan. But this official describes the amount Obama advisors are currently considering as significantly lower than both.
Obama and his economic team met for four hours yesterday. They are still working on the package, which will not be announced before the president-elect returns from Hawaii later this month.


[top]

Obamaboom fiscal fitness update


[Skip to the end]

Leaning in the right direction to restore demand.

A decisive move from the new Obama team is very possible given the latest rhetoric.

FACTBOX-Fiscal stimulus plans to tackle the crisis

Nov 23 (Reuters) – Countries around the world are setting out fiscal stimulus packages to help their economies withstand the impact of the global financial crisis.

Below are some details:

* AUSTRALIA:

— The government has announced a A$10.4 billion ($6.8 billion) package of cash handouts and family benefits and has pledged more if it is needed.

— It is providing A$1.5 billion to boost the housing and home building markets and doubling the grant for first-time home buyers. They will now get A$14,000 from an original A$7,000.

* CHINA:

— Provincial government plans will add an additional 10 trillion yuan ($1.464 trillion) to a 4 trillion yuan stimulus package announced by the central government earlier this month, state television said. The central scheme included rail and infrastructure schemes as well as extra social spending to offset the sharp drop in demand for the exports which fuel China’s economy.

— China is also changing value added tax (VAT) to allow companies to deduct the cost of capital equipment, saving them about 120 billion yuan a year.

* EUROPEAN UNION

– An economic stimulus plan to be presented on Nov. 26 will include a significant budgetary expansion, the head of the EU executive said on Friday, as it signalled longer deadlines for countries to slash budget gaps.

— German Economy Minister Michael Glos has said the plan envisaged, among other things, a 1 percentage point cut in value-added tax across the EU and that the total value of the stimulus was 130 billion euros ($163 billion).

* GERMANY:

— The government has announced a package which will generate about 50 billion euros ($64.22 billion) in investment and contracts.

– A new lending programme of up to 15 billion euros will be introduced for German state-owned development bank Kreditanstalt fuer Wiederaufbau (KfW) to strengthen its lending activities. KfW’s infrastructure programme for structurally weak local authorities will be raised by 3 billion euros.

— Urgent investment in transport will be accelerated via a new programme totalling 1 billion euros in both 2009 and 2010.

— Parliament has approved a rise in government net new borrowing in 2009 to 18.5 billion euros from 10.5 billion.

* NETHERLANDS

— The government has announced a “liquidity impulse” of about 6 billion euros ($7.5 billion), including allowing companies to write down investments earlier than usual.

— Companies will also receive temporary financial support from an unemployment fund to pay employees who will cut down on their working hours.

*RUSSIA

— Prime Minister Vladimir Putin on Nov. 20 unveiled a $20 billion economic stimulus package and help for people hurt in the economic slowdown. He offered assurances there would be no repeat of the economic turmoil when the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 and, 10 years ago, when the state defaulted on its debt.

— The package will include a cut in profit tax, which accounts for 8.5 percent of budget revenues, to 20 percent from 24 now, and a new depreciation mechanism that will allow firms to reduce the profit tax further.

— The government has already sanctioned state-run banks to support industry with billions of dollars of soft funding.

* SOUTH KOREA:

— The government has unveiled a package worth at least 14 trillion won ($9.37 billion), including tax cuts

— Measures also include an extension of 1.3 trillion won to state-owned banks to help SMEs. The government is to expand credit guarantees to SMEs by 6 trillion won.

* SPAIN:

— In the last six months, Spain announced various measures to cushion the impact of the economic slowdown and soaring unemployment including a 38 billion euro ($49.28 billion) fiscal stimulus package.

— The package includes 6 billion euros in tax cuts and 4 billion euros of liquidity to credit strapped companies and households.

— It also includes a 400-euro income tax rebate for employees, pensioners and the self-employed.

* SWITZERLAND:

— The government announced an economic stimulus package worth 890 million Swiss francs ($753 million). It includes government spending of 340 million francs on flood defence, natural disasters and energy efficiency projects.

— Spending plans also include up to 1 billion francs on roads and railways and 550 million francs as tax breaks to 650 firms for job creation programmes.

* TAIWAN:

— Taiwan has announced T$122.6 billion worth of subsidies and tax cuts and T$58.3 billion of infrastructure spending. The steps unveiled are expected to generate T$1 trillion ($31.2 billion) in investment and consumption.

* UNITED KINGDOM:

— The government is expected to announce on Monday a package of tax cuts and extra public spending of upto 20 billion pounds ($29.70 billion), with the centrepiece a temporary cut in sales tax.

— The packagesis also expected to feature tax relief for small firms, efficiency savings and help for mortgage payers.

— British Prime Minister Gordon Brown said on Nov. 11 he was ready to borrow to provide the British economy a fiscal boost and he urged other countries to do the same.

* UNITED STATES:

— President-elect Barack Obama said he is crafting a two-year plan to revive the economy and save or create 2.5 million jobs. He called in October for a $175 billion stimulus measure but appears ready to for a much larger package. — Congressional Democrats have promised to make a broad economic stimulus a priority when they reconvene in January. The package is expected to include middle-class tax cuts and billions of dollars for public works projects, such as the construction of roads, bridges and mass transit. OTE]))

— President George W. Bush signed a $168 billion, two-year economic stimulus package into law in early 2008. Of that total, $152 billion was earmarked for 2008.

— The package includes tax rebates of up to $600 per individual earning $75,000 in adjusted gross income or less and $1,200 per couple plus $300 per child. Businesses would be able to deduct half the costs of purchases of new equipment. (Editing by David Cowell; +44 207 542 6486)


[top]

ObamaBOOM around the corner?


[Skip to the end]

Obama says drafting bold economic stimulus

U.S. President-elect Barack Obama said Saturday that he was crafting an aggressive two-year stimulus plan to revive the troubled economy, warning that swift action was needed to prevent a deep slump and a spiral of falling prices.

Agreed!

“If we don’t act swiftly and boldly, most experts now believe that we could lose millions of jobs next year,” the Democratic president-elect said in a weekly radio address.

Agreed!

Obama, who succeeds President George W. Bush on Jan. 20, said the economy could get worse before it gets better. “We now risk falling into a deflationary spiral that could increase our massive debt even further,” he said.

Obama said the plan would aim to save or create 2.5 million jobs by January 2011 and would be “big enough to meet the challenges we face.” Any additional jobs would offset what is expected to be a dismal employment picture in the near future.

I vote for ‘create’ and await clarity of what he means ‘boldly’.


[top]

Obama plans will revive the economy


[Skip to the end]

Obama Says He Will Do `Whatever It Takes’ on Economy

By Edwin Chen

Nov. 17 (Bloomberg) President-elect Barack Obama said the U.S. government will do “whatever it takes” to revive the economy, and that means “we shouldn’t worry about the deficit next year or even the year after.”

In the short term, “the most important thing is that we avoid a deepening recession,” Obama said in an interview broadcast last evening on CBS News’s “60 Minutes.”


[top]

Re: Obama’s Yuan Calls- NOT GOOD


[Skip to the end]

>   
>   On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 7:09 AM, Michael wrote:
>   

Obama’s Yuan Calls May Put U.S. on Collision Course With China

by Judy Chen

Nov. 6 (Bloomberg) — Barack Obama’s calls for changes in China’s yuan policy may put the president-elect on a collision course with the U.S.’s second-largest trade partner, which is holding the currency stable to support its export-led economy.

Obama said China must stop manipulating the currency in a letter to the National Council of Textile Organizations released on Oct. 24.

This is counter productive for the US standard of living.

Obama has yet to discover imports are real benefits and exports real costs.

The People’s Bank of China has kept the yuan almost unchanged against the dollar since mid-July as it shifts focus from countering inflation to sustaining growth amid a global credit crisis. The Foreign Ministry said last week the U.S. shouldn’t blame its trade deficit on exchange rates.

“Obama may exert more pressure on China’s foreign-exchange policy to boost U.S. exports and curb unemployment, but China will first consider its own economic fundamentals,” said Ha Jiming, Hong Kong-based chief economist at China International Capital Corp., the nation’s first Sino-foreign investment bank.

Hopefully, Obama will see the light and it will instead be a case of ‘when the facts change I change’.

Policy of Stability
Paulson said on Oct. 21 that he is “pleased” that China’s currency has appreciated more than 20 percent since a peg against the dollar was abandoned in July 2005.

Paulson either has it backwards, or he’s being subversive.

“It will be emphasized in the next Strategic Economic Dialogue that it is more important than ever that China should rely more on domestic demand rather than its trade surplus to sustain economic growth,” said Nicholas Lardy, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington.

Same- ignorant or subversive are the only possibilities.

“Currency manipulation has been a quite specific implication in law, and no other president has ever used that term,” said Straszheim. If Obama doesn’t take actions following the charge that China is manipulating the yuan, “he will be regarded as another old type politician who promises one thing during the campaign and does another in office,” he added.


[top]

Statement of Senator Obama on moving financial legislation forward


[Skip to the end]

Statement of Senator Obama on Moving Financial Legislation Forward


Yesterday, within the course of a few hours, the failure to pass the economic rescue plan in Washington led to the single largest decline of the stock market in two decades.

Might have been worse if they had passed the plan!!!

While I, like others, am outraged that the reign of irresponsibility on Wall Street and in Washington has created the current crisis,

All a result of institutional structure that put the incentives in place in place to do what was done.

Including the way Washington works.

I also know that continued inaction in the face of the gathering storm in our financial markets would be catastrophic for our economy and our families.

At this moment, when the jobs, retirement savings, and economic security of all Americans hang in the balance, it is imperative that all of us – Democrats and Republicans alike – come together to meet this crisis.

The bill rejected yesterday was a marked improvement over the original blank check proposed by the Bush Administration. It included restraints on CEO pay, protections for homeowners, strict oversight as to how the money is spent, and an assurance that taxpayers will recover their money
once the economy recovers.

None of that matters for the ‘success’ of the plan which is doubtful, as it’s not much more than an asset swap, and with the changes, the additions of incentives for CEOs not to participate.

Given the progress we have made, I believe we are unlikely to succeed if we start from scratch or reopen negotiations about the core elements of the agreement. But in order to pass this plan, we must do more.

One step we could take to potentially broaden support for the legislation and shore up our economy would be to expand federal deposit insurance for families and small businesses across America who have invested their money in our banks.

The majority of American families should rest assured that the deposits they have in our banks are safe. Thanks to measures put in place during the Great Depression, deposits of up to $100,000 are guaranteed by the federal government.

While that guarantee is more than adequate for most families, it is insufficient for many small businesses that maintain bank accounts to meet their payroll, buy their supplies, and invest in expanding and creating jobs. The current insurance limit of $100,000 was set 28 years ago and has not been adjusted for inflation.

That is why today, I am proposing that we also raise the FDIC limit to $250,000 as part of the economic rescue package – a step that would boost small businesses, make our banking system more secure, and help restore public confidence in our financial system.

Misses the point. Moving to $250,000 does nothing for the banking system. The cap needs to be removed, and the Fed given the mandate to lend unsecured to member banks in unlimited quantities.

Institutionally, this can be facilitated by extending FDIC insurance to Fed deposits at member banks.

That way, any ultimate bank insolvencies and losses continue to be charged to the FDIC.

I will be talking to leaders and members of Congress later today to offer this idea and urge them to act without delay to pass a rescue plan,” said Barack Obama.

A baby step in the right direction.

Not enough to make a difference.

Doesn’t address the issue of aggregate demand and homeowner’s ability to pay as employment stagnates.


[top]

Re: Resource allocation


[Skip to the end]

>   
>   On 8/3/08, Craig wrote:
>   
>   Ok. And the irony is as prices fall, demand increases again.
>   Until consuming governments get their head around that fact
>   and put some kind of floor under crude prices to incent
>   substitution (which may be beyond their thinking and/or impossible
>   politically), it seems like crude prices are gonna play rope-a-dope
>   with consumers.
>   
>   
>   Craig
>   
>   

Crude will be rationed as is everything else (scarcity, etc.).

The question is how. Ration by price or by other things?

Rationing by price is the most pervasive and means the wealthy (by definition) outbid the less wealthy for the available supply.

Make you wonder why the Democrats support higher prices, as that means they support their supporters going without while the wealthy drive any size SUV they want. Much like wondering why Obama supports Bernanke after Bernanke explained to Congress how he’s keeping inflation down by keeping a lid on inflation expectations after explaining the main component of inflation expectations is workers demanding higher wages, meaning Obama, Kennedy, and the rest of the left is praising Bernanke for doing a good job of suppressing wages.

Non-price rationing is less common but not unfamiliar, such as mandating cars get an average of 27 mpg, minimum efficiency standards for refrigerators, windows, etc. This takes an element of rationing by price away and results in the wealthy consuming less and leaving some for the less wealthy to consume a bit.

So seems to me the logical path for the Democrats would be something like my 30 mph speed limit for private transportation, which is ‘progressive’ and also drives the move towards public transportation with non price incentives as previously outlined. But there hasn’t even been any discussion of a progressive policy response. All seem highly regressive to me.

So I expect the world’s new and growing class of wealthy will continue to outbid our least wealthy for fuel and other resources.

Also, there may be limits to how high we want world consumption/burning of fuels for all the various ‘green’ reasons.

That would mean drilling and other production increases are out, as would be increased use of coal via the electric grid for electric cars.

And, again, it would be the world’s wealthy outbidding the less wealthy for consumption of the allowable annual fuel burn, as somehow allocation by price continues to rule.

Most paths keep coming down to the continuing combination of weakness and higher prices.

Warren

[top][end]


(comments from my brother, Seth, who was cc’d)

>   
>   I think democrats have lots of business and profits waiting
>   in govt subsidies for wind and solar. If oil prices fall that goes
>   away for now and they can’t produce on the subsidies for
>   them-cynical view but probably true
>   
>   There are also a lot of wealthy democrats and they want their
>   votes. Poor people all vote for democrats anyway-even with
>   declining lifestyles they are not going to McCain. So I think
>   Obama is pandering to the wealthy-it might be who he is-no
>   one really knows.
>   
>   With all of their green talk I have not seen any of them reduce
>   air travel, suv caravans or turn off the a/c in the capital. Just a
>   way to get votes and sound concerned. I saw a tv program
>   about how the chinese olympic swimming building is a green
>   sustainable building. It is 7 acres, pools, 25,000 people.
>   they finally said it uses about 25% less energy than a comparable
>   building would have. That is not green or sustainable, especially
>   since the building was not needed in the first place. I think “green”
>   is about making money, not the environment.
>   
>   
>   Seth
>   

I just can’t allow myself to be that cynical like you new yorkers!

:)

Warren

>   
>   
>   I think I am cynical usually, but this green thing drives me nuts
>   it started 30 years ago but is now all about money
>   when I see some lights turned off in Times Square (even in the
>   daytime) or the 5 huge spot lights on the CBS building lighting up
>   Katie Couric’s 50′ x 30′ poster which are on 24 hours a day turned
>   off, then I will believe it is about resources and not money.
>   there is a long way to go.
>   they advertise expensive green buildings here-I am not kidding-the
>   big thing is thermostats with timers on them and bamboo floors-didn’t
>   we have those 30 years ago??
>   
>   they talked about the oscar ceremony being green this year-the
>   celebrities were all giddy about it-what they did was use red
>   carpet made of recycled fibers????? what is that?
>   absolutely nothing-
>   anyway, time to calm down. too much excitement here
>   seth –
>   
>   

[top]

Professor James Galbraith on Obama economics team


[Skip to the end]

More on Obamanomincs:

It was announced Professor James Galbraith was on the new list of economic advisers.

  • He knows that government spending is not revenue constrained.
  • He knows solvency is not an issue for the government.
  • He knows the ‘pay-go’ notion is flawed and works against our standard of living.
  • He knows the criticism of Bush leaving the debt to our children is absurd.
  • He knows there is no operational risk of social security ‘running out of money.’
  • He knows social security payments are not ‘paid for’ per se by taxes or the trust fund accounting.
  • He knows the Fed is about price, and not quantity.
  • He knows imports are a real benefit, exports a real cost.
  • He knows our policy of blocking central banks and monetary authorities from accumulating $US financial assets is killing the goose that’s been laying the golden eggs.
  • He knows that unemployment is the evidence that the deficit is too small.
  • He knows that loans create deposits and reserves.
  • He knows that savings is not needed to have funding for investment.
  • He knows that our taxed advantage pension and retirement systems and programs reduce demand and cause the need for the government to run deficits to add that demand back.
  • He knows the price level is a function of prices paid by govt. and not a function of interest rates set by the Fed.
  • He knows the Saudis (and maybe Russians) are setting the price of crude.
  • He knows this is causing a cost push ‘inflation’ that is punishing working people disproportionately.
  • He knows biofuel policy is converting the world’s food supply to fuel and starving millions to death.
  • And a lot more.
  • And he knows the others on the Obama economic adviser list either don’t know, pretend to not know, or have long forgotten all the above.
  • And he knows Obama’s vision can only accidentally be achieved with his current economic rhetoric.
  • And I know he has a fighting chance to be heard.


[top]