Tag Archives: political economy

The New York Times Misunderstands

Posted on by
Reply

Again.  This time the paper is hyperventilating over the coming end of the world order as we know it because the UK and the US are reaffirming our special relationship through the mechanism, as the NYT‘s headline has it, of British Alignment With Trump….

Great Britain’s relationship with the US spells doom because, as seen through the lens of the NYT‘s TDS, Great Britain’s dependency on Europe will be upset, and the European Union is key to world stability.  For instance:

Mr Trump offered to reward Britain’s exit from the European Union with a speedy trade deal. But this risks encouraging more exits from the bloc and possibly its disintegration. The resulting turmoil on the Continent, which includes several top British trading partners, could risk harming Britain’s economy far more than an American trade deal would help.

There are two major (not sole) reasons the Brits chose to go out from the EU.  One is the ability to cut its own trade deals without the bureaucrats of the EU ruling body looking over their shoulder and telling them no, they can’t do that.  The other is the ability to control their own borders and deciding for themselves who should be allowed to come in without the bureaucrats of the EU ruling body….

The paper’s plaint also operates from the false premise that the EU should remain together unchanged.  The nations of the EU are too disparate in social, political, economic philosophies; it’s an inherently unstable arrangement.  Too, those several top British trading partners, which are not limited to France and Germany, will benefit from being able to cut their own trade deals, should they decide to go out from the EU, too.

Beyond that, British security will be greater for the closer alignment with us that’s becoming possible than it is and would be with an EU as timid toward Russia as it is and wants to be.

“Stock Market Gained $2T in Wealth Since Trump Elected”

Posted on by
2

That’s the headline on a Fox News insider report of Club For Growth founder Stephen Moore’s claim about one outcome of President Donald Trump’s election.  It’s certainly true that the market has run up hard since the election (although it’s had other periods of sharp gains, too, that are unrelated to elections).  Moore also was quoted as saying,

This could be the start of a big bull market rally[.]

There are a couple of things about this, one bigger than the other.  The lesser thing is that the stock market has been in a bull run for most of the year.

The bigger thing, though, is the misconception of “wealth” in the stock market.  The stock market has gained value, not wealth.  Wealth is what someone can spend on necessities and froo-froo, actual goods and services; stock shares aren’t those.  To turn that (gain in) value into actual wealth, all those higher priced shares would have to be sold for real dollars—and if everyone did that roughly simultaneously, most of that value gain would disappear in the selling.

Funding Sanctuary Cities

Posted on by
Reply

White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus on Federal funds—your tax money—for “sanctuary” cities:

[I]f you defy the laws of this country, you shouldn’t receive federal tax payer dollars from the people of this country…in some cases, you have folks that have committed crimes…and in every other jurisdiction, they say “OK, you’ve committed a crime. You now have to leave the country.”

What the man said.

Bigotry from Ignorance

Posted on by
Reply

The Owners of Strata Plan LMS 4025* owns a building in City of Vancouver, British Columbia, that houses among other businesses a restaurant that went out of business.  Mengfa International, which owns a small restaurant chain known as Moby Dick’s, wants to open a Moby Dick’s restaurant in that space, but the strata won’t allow it.

It insisted “that the word ‘Dick’ in Moby Dick was an offensive term[.]”

Mengfa demurred (and is suing the strata):

It says that the Moby Dick name and logo are “not offensive to the public, given its literary significance and fame.”

Which would be obvious to anyone with an actual education.  It’s just as obvious to anyone outside a particular building in the City that Dick is a common nickname for those named Richard.  As it is, the strata’s claim, aside from interfering with legitimate business, is a deep insult to the intelligence of anyone with any sort of education.  Or possessed of actual experience of the world, even just that part of it immediately outside the bubble formed from a shell of brick and mortar.

Illiterati like the members of the building council that runs this strata illustrate the bigotry that flows from the ignorance that too many modern education systems create when they put feel-good esteem froo-froo ahead of actual education and performance accountability for students.

Call me Ishmael, indeed.

*A strata, according to the Courthouse News Service site is a Canadian legal entity that

may be created to divide a building or buildings or land into “separate components that are individually owned and common components owned by all of the owners.”

The building of LMS 4025 is run by a building council.

The Financial Stability Oversight Council

Posted on by
Reply

Ryan Tracy, writing in The Wall Street Journal, thought Republicans should love this Council and be at pains to keep it, even as they look to “quickly scal[e] back Obama-era policies.”

I demur.

Tracy suggested

Consider the powers [FSOC] grants the Treasury secretary: As chair of FSOC—whose members include the chairs of the Federal Reserve and Securities and Exchange Commission—[Treasury Secretary nominee Steven] Mr Mnuchin  can convene a meeting of the top financial regulators at any time, and set the agenda.

SecTreas already can do this.  While he can’t compel attendance, the regulators would have hard time declining to attend or explaining to the rest of us their decision to stay away.

FSOC can make public statements or recommendations that have a name-and-shame effect.

SecTreas already can do this, too, as can any Cabinet Secretary and Agency head, did any of these have the courage to speak without hiding behind the comfortable numbers of a council.

FSOC’s greatest power is to designate “systemically important” financial firms outside the banking system for stricter federal oversight.

Mere existence of this authority is abusive overreach by Government. The Feds have no business in this business at all.

If Mr Mnuchin sympathizes with FSOC detractors, he could call fewer meetings with lighter agendas.

SecTreas doesn’t need the existence of a Council to decline to call meetings of regulators.

It’s past time for this abusive Council, and Dodd-Frank, to be done away with.

Full stop.