Category Archives: Economics

Miscellaneous economy stuff

Running Away

Posted on by
Reply

Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D, NY) is terrified of the upcoming Senate vote on her New Green Deal proposal that she has laid before the House.  She has her fear on display in this tweet of hers:

The GOP’s whole game of wasting votes in Congress to target others “on the record”, for leg [legislation] they have no intent to pass, is a disgrace.  Stop wasting the American peoples’ time + learn to govern. Our jobs aren’t for campaigning, & that’s exactly what these bluff-votes are for.

Apparently, Progressive-Democrats’ jobs aren’t for actually voting on the proposals they make.  It seems that Progressive-Democrat proposals aren’t actually serious policy ideas; they’re just virtue signaling.

There’s this, too, from some number of Progressive-Democratic Senators:

Some Democrats said they plan to vote “present” on the resolution to signal their opposition to what they call a “sham” vote….

These guys, if they follow through with just kicking back with their feet up on their Senate desks, will be doing more than just cowering away from being on the record in the man-caused climate debate. They’ll be betraying their constituents who hired them and sent them to the Senate to do more substantive things than just being…present.

Is that why, maybe, that Progressive-Democrat are so terrified of folks actually going on the record on Ocasio-Cortez’ “climate” proposal? Is that why, maybe, that climatistas, including other Progressive-Democrats, are so terrified of differing opinions on the state and trend of our climate—terrified to the extent that they’re trying to make disagreeing with them on climate a crime?

Because they might be found to be who they really are?

Time for a Clean Break

Posted on by
Reply

No more bad faith pseudo-negotiations by Brussels.  No more dithering and bad-skilled pseudo-negotiations by Theresa May.

The UK asked the European Union to delay its departure from the bloc until June 30, an extension that if approved would give Prime Minister Theresa May just weeks to break an impasse in Parliament over her withdrawal deal.

It’s not just an internal impasse between the PM and Parliament. It’s also and more importantly an impasse between Great Britain and Brussels.

Cut the cord.  The other 27 nations of the EU, or at least that one of them with sense and integrity, should reject the request for more time.  It’s time that only will be wasted by both sides, each for its own reasons.

Update: The EU, lacking even that single nation of the 27, has voted to grant Great Britain’s request for more time before leaving. In fact, the EU offered a couple of options for more time.

  • Option 1: If the UK parliament votes for the withdrawal agreement next week, it can delay exiting until May 22 to ratify the text.
  • Option 2: If it does not approve the deal, the EU will offer a shorter extension until April 12.
  • If it rejects the deal and takes the shorter extension, it can then decide whether to seek a much longer delay and vote in the European elections or leave on April 12 without a deal.

The withdrawal agreement the Parliament is expected to vote on is the same one it’s rejected twice before.  The EU isn’t serious about that thing being accepted on the third try.

This is a sham offer, designed only to drag things out; Brussels is continuing to deal in bad faith. The continent has, perhaps, one or both of two motives for this disingenuousity.  It’s still looking to make an example of Great Britain as a warning to other member nations that might be thinking of leaving.  It’s looking to dismember Great Britain by taking Northern Ireland out of the nation with its demand of an open, unguarded border between Great Britain and the Republic of Ireland.

If the Brits have any sense at all left (an increasing question), they’ll reject the deal and go out from the EU on schedule, on 29 March, and with no deal at all.  No amount of time is going to get them a better deal, incessant delay will only give the Remainers on both side of the Channel time to find a way to keep Great Britain trapped in the EU cage.

Progressive-Democrats Politicizing Banking?

Posted on by
Reply

Who would have thought such a thing?

House Financial Services Committee Chairwoman Maxine Waters (D, CA) has decided to use her committee to go after the hated banking industry.  Congresswoman and Committee member Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D, NY) has announced

We’re going to hold oversight hearings to make these banks accountable for investing in and making money off of the detention of immigrants[.]

Dangerously, and sadly, the overt intimidation seems to be working.

On February 5 JPMorgan Chase announced it will no longer do business with private prisons. In January Wells Fargo said it would no longer market to private prison companies, aiming to achieve the same objective by attrition.

Never mind that the Progressive-Democratic Party—then just the Democratic Party, with 61 Senators and 292 Representatives in that 95th Congress—politicized, and racialized, banking ‘way back in 1977 with their Community Reinvestment Act.

Today’s bankers are bowing and scraping and showing the same abject cowardice that bankers in the late ’70s and ’80s displayed when those Democrats attacked the banks for being banks—and for concerning themselves with their fiduciary duty to their owners and investors regarding loan risk.

It’s going to be a long two years for the American financial industry and so for our economy.

Defying Trump?

Posted on by
2

That’s what the headline would have it.

The German government is poised to renege on its pledge to raise military spending, the latest gesture of defiance by Chancellor Angela Merkel toward President Donald Trump.

And

Under the new budget plan, unveiled by the finance ministry Monday, [Germany’s] spending would rise to 1.37% of GDP next year, but then decrease again to 1.33% in 2019, 1.29% in 2022 and 1.25% in 2023.

However.

Germany won’t be defying Trump. It’ll be betraying NATO and its fellow members.  Especially those eastern European members that front on Russia and behind which Germany ducks.

Alphabet Objects

Posted on by
Reply

Alphabet, through its Google subordinate, objects to the White House’s and JCS’ characterization of it as aiding our enemy, the People’s Republic of China.

An anonymous (perhaps because he’s speaking without Google management’s permission, perhaps because he, or that management, is embarrassed by his claims) Google spokesperson said

We are not working with the Chinese military. We are working with the US government, including the Department of Defense, in many areas including cybersecurity, recruiting and healthcare.

Yet Alphabet has withdrawn Google from working with our defense establishment on drone or artificial intelligence technologies that could be used for active defense of our nation.

On the other hand, Alphabet has engaged Google with the People’s Republic of China for work supporting PRC government censorship via a censored and censorable version of a search engine for use in the PRC.  Alphabet has engaged Google with the PRC for work on aspects of AI—ostensibly for that censorable search engine—that can be used by the PRC’s People’s Liberation Army for its own defensive and offensive operations.