Tag Archives: economics

Mistaken Emphasis

Posted on by
Reply

It’s in the lede of this Just the News article.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R, LA) faces his first major tests as leader of the chamber in passing a federal budget that can please his party and still pass the Democratic Senate as well as aid for Ukraine and Israel.

It’s certainly true that Johnson and the Republican caucus in the House face tight deadlines (artificially tight, stemming as they do from an irrational fear of a partial government closure, but that’s a separate matter). But it’s on the obstructionist Progressive-Democratic Party-run Senate to work with Republicans to pass the House’s budget.

That includes, too, necessary aid for Ukraine and Israel, and for the Republic of China. The Johnson-led House already has passed an Energy Department appropriations bill that cuts $857 billion (over a period of time) from that department. Similar cuts in six of the seven remaining appropriations bills free up a bunch of money for a serious defense restoral and buildup and for aid for those three critical nations, while still executing an overall serious spending cut.

It’s important to note, too, that the “no blank check” position of many Republicans, which most of the press (not JtN presently) spins as Republican opposition to further aid for Ukraine, does not actually mean no further money for such aid. On that matter, here’s Johnson:

We all do [support aid for Ukraine]. We’re going to have conditions on that so we’re working through it.

Those conditions have centered on audit trails (most of which already are in place) tracing the money and equipment from their origin to their arrival at the front.

Such audit trails should be required on all spending that Congress enacts, with an attached requirement that the audits be thorough and have deadlines for their production. Further, spending should be suspended in those areas and on those programs where audits are late or incomplete—with no excuses for their tardiness or incompleteness. There also must be sanctions on the auditors, their supervisors, and the Cabinet Department and Agency heads where there is evidence of audit pencil-whipping.

There’s a Reason for That

Posted on by
Reply

A bunch of DC Metropolitan Police Department officers are earning a lot of overtime income, with some earning more than $100k, and some earning more that DC’s mayor, Muriel Bowser (D).

The department is struggling with recruiting and retaining officers, which increases the overtime load.

Yeah.

These cops are working harder than Bowser is, and through longer days than she has. That’s a result of Bowser’s administration’s determined defunding of the DC police force.

Mandating Supply in the Absence of Demand

Posted on by
Reply

What could go wrong? Look at Progressive-Democrat President Joe Biden’s mandate, through his Energy Department (run by the Secretary who thought it hilarious that we should—or could—produce more oil), that American automakers—Ford, GM, and Stellantis—make only battery cars by 2032. Along the way, look at his Energy Department’s proposed new rule:

The Energy Department in the spring proposed to eliminate the 6.67 multiplier….
Detroit auto makers would be slammed harder than foreign competitors by the regulatory changes because pick-ups and SUVs make up a larger share of their fleet sales. “The average projected compliance cost per vehicle for the D3 is $2,151, while non-D3 auto manufacturers only see an increase of $546 per vehicle,” the Big Three recently told the Energy Department.

That multiplier was an early regulation that made it possible to impute (however accurately or inaccurately) the miles per gallon achieved by internal combustion engines—itself subject to increasingly higher requirements under successive ED regulations—to the “mileage” achieved by battery cars. ED’s proposed rule change—under that D3 regime—essentially eliminates the mileage equivalent multiplier.

Combined with Biden’s requirement that our automakers make only battery cars by 10 (now 9) years from now, results in this outcome:

[U]nder the Energy Department’s proposal, it could make more sense to pay the government penalties than to increase production of EVs that don’t sell. This may be why GM is now throttling EV production, as Ford has also done.

It’s cheaper for the manufacturers to non-comply and pay the vig than it is for them to produce and pay the even bigger cost of not selling a government-required product the buyers—us ordinary Americans—don’t want and won’t buy.

And what does that preference for violating a law say about a culture of routine law-breaking?

Biden and his Progressive-Democratic Party syndicate can’t even get Rule by Law right, much less live within the dreary and inconvenient process of operating within the law—Rule of Law. And we Americans pay the price of that.

They Don’t Know What They’re Doing?

Posted on by
Reply

Or is that they’re just riding the Climate Funding Industry Hobby Horse?

East Coast wind projects are in jeopardy after a decision by New York regulators Thursday to deny requests from renewable energy developers to charge customers billions of dollars more.
Offshore wind developers say they have been struggling against record inflation, supply chain issues, and interest rate hikes. Facing these pressures, Orsted, BP, and Equinor and other renewable developers requested that contracts for four offshore projects and 86 land-based projects be renegotiated, according to Reuters.
The offshore developers asked the New York Public Service Commission to alter its long term contracts and raise purchase prices to a level that would have let them collect an additional $38 billion from ratepayers.

They missed—badly—their initial financing and execution estimates, and they failed badly in their early adjustments following actual execution. The supply chain problems about which they complain have been extant since the depths of the Wuhan Virus situation. The inflation that has them in such an uproar has been a problem for the last three years. The rising interest rates have been an inevitable outcome of the inflation.

Do these guys—at the top of the top companies in their industry—really not know what they are doing?

Or are they just trying to rake in the money from their shadow industry of global warming hysteria funding, and some jurisdictions are starting to get tired of being taken for granted as cash cows?

False Choices

Posted on by
Reply

The Wall Street Journal‘s Editors are correct that, as their subheadline says,

Helping Kyiv won’t rob weapons to fight Hamas or Hezbollah.

This is in response to some otherwise reasonably intelligent politicians insist on that false choice—that it’s either Ukraine or Israel. Senator Josh Hawley (R, MO), for instance:

Israel is facing existential threat. Any funding for Ukraine should be redirected to Israel immediately[.]

This is a foolishly false dichotomy, for all that, in Hawley’s case, it centers on his disdain for Ukraine and his lack of understanding of the threat the Russian barbarian hordes present.

The false choice representation is broader than that, though.

It’s also a false choice between either Israel or Ukraine, and our southern border, and it’s a false choice between any of those and supporting the Republic of China in deterring the People’s Republic of China or in fighting the PRC if they go ahead and invade.

What’s necessary—and more generally beneficial—is a reallocation of existing expenditures. That requires the Progressive-Democratic Party Representatives and Senators to either get out of the way or work with Republicans in a serious manner to do the reallocations.

It also requires timid Republican Senators to get out of the way or work seriously within their party and for the Republican House caucus to deal, with finality, with the Chaos Gang led by Florida’s Matt Gaetz and Texas’ Chip Roy and get serious about leading the House.