Category Archives: markets

National Security and Economic Relations with the PRC

Posted on by
Reply

The Fiscal Times had a thought.

There is an emerging danger that rivalry for strategic influence in the western Pacific will damage trade and investment relations.

As if this is a bad thing.  “rivalry for strategic influence in the Western Pacific” is a euphemism for the PRC’s seizure and occupation of the South China Sea and the islands in it, and the PRC’s terraforming of many of those islands and subsequent construction of military bases on them.

The only reason for the grab and the military build up is to intimidate the other nations rimming the Sea, nations who are, variously, our trading partners, our friends, and potentially our allies—and friends.  The PRC’s goal is to drive us out of the Sea, which can only damage our trade and investment relations with the region as a whole.

Our economic relations with the PRC do not need to come at the expense of any of that.

A Good Thing about Price Wars

Posted on by
Reply

…on the geopolitical stage.  Dan Strumpf and Jenny Hsu talked about a broader question in their piece in The Wall Street Journal; I want to focus on one aspect of it.

Stiffening competition from countries such as Russia and Iran is threatening Saudi Arabia’s longtime hold over markets including China, Japan, and India.

It’s certainly true that stiffening competition is threatening Saudi Arabia’s longtime hold over market pricing; however a hold over markets is quite another oil well.  Saudi Arabia has held throughout this supply explosion’s depressing effect on oil prices that it’s not going to reduce production rates and sacrifice its market share—its hold on markets—on the altar of pricing.  Furthermore, the kingdom’s replacement of its aging market share hawk with a younger market share hawk would seem to indicate a continuation of the Saudis’ position that they will do what they need to do to preserver that share (and that hold).

So, what does competition do, particularly with regard to oil-hungry customers like the PRC, Japan, and India?

It generates a price war.  Don’t look for oil prices to rise significantly above current levels (OK, maybe they’ll go as high as $60-ish).

Russia and Iran can’t afford those prices; their budgets can’t hack them.  Saudi Arabia can, for quite some time, yet.  That alone makes this particular price war attractive.

The Left Doesn’t Like Free Speech

Posted on by
Reply

Especially when it differs from the Left’s holy writ.

The political left is threatening to boycott companies that contribute to a GOP convention that could nominate Donald Trump.

Color of Change, MoveOn.org, CREDO and UltraViolet, et al., are threatening to job businesses that support this year’s Republican convention, but not this year’s Democratic convention.

Of course, the rank cowardice of today’s business “leaders” contributes to the Left’s assault.

The campaign appears to have already succeeded in getting Coca-Cola to limit its GOP convention support to $75,000 this year, compared to $660,000 in 2012.

And

In 2012 Color of Change led a similar assault on companies supporting the American Legislative Exchange Council, which promotes free-market policies in the states.  …  ALEC’s reward for decades of pro-growth advocacy was to see its biggest contributors—Coke [again!], General Electric, Kraft, McDonald’s, Wal-Mart —drop funding and head for the tall grass.

Such cowardice shouldn’t be rewarded; this surrender to threatening speech merely contributes to further assaults on speech—one of the most basic freedoms of our Republic.  But, then, cowards don’t like free speech, either.

Obamacare Strikes Yet Again

Posted on by
Reply

Insurers will seek significant premium hikes under President Barack Obama’s health care law this summer….
…
For example, in Virginia, a state that reports early, nine insurers returning to the HealthCare.gov marketplace are seeking average premium increases that range from 9.4% to 37.1%.

And

The health law’s nagging problems center on lower-than-hoped-for enrollment, sicker-than-expected customers, and a balky internal stabilization system that didn’t deliver as advertised and was already scheduled to be pared back next year.

Who is truly surprised by this?  Oh, yeah….

Market Choice?

Posted on by
Reply

Can’t have that.

The Obama administration is locked and loaded for a fresh push on gun control initiatives—reportedly moving to advocate for so-called “smart gun” technology….

Smart gun technology research may well be a good idea, and having smart guns—weapons that can be fired only by their legitimate owners—certainly seems like a good idea.

Even Government involvement in funding basic research—the secrets of the universe kind of thing—or doing its own basic research might be a good idea.

However, Government involvement in engineering research, which smart gun tech development surely is, and Government involvement in determining, or even merely jawboning, what products it wants in a free market most assuredly are not legitimate.

These are matters for private citizens, private enterprise, and the market place to determine.

Full stop.