Tag Archives: political economy

Newspeak In America

Posted on by
Reply

…via the leftwing Forbes magazine. And it’s a disappointing position for the used-to-be Conservative Steve Forbes to take via his magazine.

Randall Lane, the editor of Forbes magazine, issued a warning to businesses this week that they should avoid hiring any press secretaries that served in the Trump White House, claiming that doing so will make their companies instantly untrustworthy and subject to heightened journalistic scrutiny.

Lane went on:

Let it be known to the business world: hire any of Trump’s fellow fabulists…and Forbes will assume that everything your company or firm talks about is a lie.

And the newspeak of Forbes through his magazine and his editor:

This isn’t cancel culture[.]

American Energy

Posted on by
Reply

…independence today. Tomorrow, American energy dependence.

Bloomberg is reporting that the US didn’t import any oil at all from Saudi Arabia last week, the first time in 35 years. That’s part of a longer term trend in declining Saudi oil imports over the last six years, especially. See the graph just below.

This trend is a result of the US technology advance of fracking which both drove down the cost of getting the oil (and natural gas) out of the ground and drastically increasing our own oil and gas production—virtually eliminating our dependence on foreign oil and gas and making us net exporters of both.

However.

Watch for American energy independence to (re)degrade into energy dependence on foreign nations under the Biden administration.

Watch that dependence made doubly vulnerable as the Biden administration reduces funding for our national defense, including particularly our Navy, so that we will be less able to defend the shipping lanes carrying that foreign energy to us.

The People’s Republic of China, beginning under the Obama régime, already is in a position to shut off the shipping lanes carrying trillions of dollars of goods, including crude, to us through the South China Sea, and they’re building/acquiring naval bases for the PLA on the west coast of Africa and creating “economic” ties with island nations on the eastern boundary of the Caribbean Sea, and on the north coast of South America. And Biden’s softness toward the PLC is well-known.

Sound Money and the PRC

Posted on by
Reply

In a Letter to The Wall Street Journal Wednesday, one writer had this on the idea of the People’s Republic of China being a competitor with its renminbi as global reserve currency and its bond market as debt safe haven:

Credible money paired with reduced government spending have long been pillars of conservative rhetoric stateside, and with good reason.

Indeed. However, what the writer elided are the capital risk the PRC poses with its history of limiting or barring repatriation of profit, the economic risk from the PRC’s requirement that foreign companies give up their technologies and intellectual properties to domestic companies as a condition of doing business in the PRC, and the political risk of the PRC’s requirement that companies supply its intelligence community with any information that community “requests.”

The absence of these risks in the US also is an important aspect of conservative economic and political thought—and not just rhetoric.

It’s Not Our Money

Posted on by
Reply

That’s the position of New York Governor Andrew Cuomo (D). On the heels of the Progressive-Democrats winning both of Georgia’s Senate seats, giving control of the Senate to the Progressive-Democratic Party, he had this to say:

Washington has…literally have taken billions of dollars from us, and that was a function of the Senate and the president, and they are both gone. And today, Washington theft ends and compensation for the victims of the crimes of the past four years begins. New Yorkers have been crime victims by the theft of the federal government.
We want a return of the state’s property that was stolen by Washington over the past four years. They wouldn’t pay us state and local funding, even though this state has a $15 billion deficit….

Because it’s not our money. It’s not anybody’s money but the New York Government’s.  Pay up, suckers.

Surrender?

Posted on by
Reply

Recall that the New York Stock Exchange, pursuant to an Executive Order regarding US investors and People’s Republic of China’s PLA-owned or -controlled companies, had begun the process of delisting China Telecom Corp Ltd, China Mobile Ltd, and China Unicom Hong Kong Ltd.

Now the NYSE has walked that back and decided not to proceed with the delisting. Exchange management have chosen to not provide any details or rationale for their, other than that their decision follows “further consultation” with federal regulators. The Exchange’s full statement can be read here; it’s carefully uninformative.

I have to wonder: is this in response to the PRC’s threat to take the necessary countermeasures to resolutely safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese companies? Or is it an attempt to duck away from those threatened countermeasures rather than fighting a battle that needs to be won?

The foregoing was written Tuesday. Now the NYSE has reversed itself again:

it received “new specific guidance” from the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control on Tuesday, which listed the three companies’ American depositary receipts as being covered by Mr. Trump’s order.

Which raises an additional question: who’s actually in charge at the NYSE, since the new specific guidance should not have been necessary.