The BP Gulf Oil Spill, Regulatory Capture and Government Failure

As the BP Gulf Oil Spill crisis drags on, the calls and screams to have people criminally prosecuted will become ever more shrill and demanding.

Who and what is ultimately to blame?

Looking at BP's role and lobbying efforts in American politics reveals something very interesting about the nature of political systems and the human condition.

See: Feel the Rage

The liberals' fury at the President is almost as astounding as their outrage over the discovery that oil companies and their regulators might have grown too cozy. In economic literature, this behavior is known as "regulatory capture," and the current political irony is that this is a long-time conservative critique of the regulatory state.

The Nobel economist George Stigler of the University of Chicago was one of the concept's main developers, and it is a seminal plank of the "public choice" school of economics for which James Buchanan won the economics Nobel in 1986. Ronald Reagan warned about this in different words in one of his farewell speeches.

In the better economic textbooks, regulatory capture is described as a "government failure," as opposed to a market failure. It refers to the fact that individuals or companies with the highest interest or stake in a policy outcome will be able to focus their energies on politicians and bureaucracies to get the outcome they prefer.

See: Once a government pet, BP now a capitalist tool

While BP has resisted some government interventions, it has lobbied for tax hikes, greenhouse gas restraints, the stimulus bill, the Wall Street bailout, and subsidies for oil pipelines, solar panels, natural gas and biofuels.

Now that BP’s oil rig has caused the biggest environmental disaster in American history, the Left is pulling the same bogus trick it did with Enron and AIG: Whenever a company earns universal ire, declare it the poster boy for the free market.

Making government more powerful, makes it more corruptible.

Government is corruptible because people are corruptible. There is no getting around or away from that fact.

As government grows and is given more control over the details and minutia of our daily lives, the scope of corruptibility of the government grows with it.

When the government makes a law, a rule or a regulation regarding a behavior, it affects peoples lives. Laws, rules and regulations are created with the specific intent of affecting peoples lives. Since laws, rules and regulations affect peoples lives, they create an incentive for those most affected to be able to influence those that are making the laws, rules and regulations.

There is a give an take to this. Everyone has things that they want. Everything becomes negotiable. Anything can be bought if the price is right and a seller has something that a buyer wants.

The process that this all gets worked out in, where the negotiations are made, the horse trading is done and back room deals are dealt, we call politics.

People's property and lives are at stake. The costs and prices become greater as the scope and power of the laws, rules and regulations increase.

The end results can be disturbing and very predictable.

How is that "Hope and Change" working for you?

It seems it ain't working so well for Obama's "progressive" supporters.

See: Progressives Ask: Is It Obama, Or Is It Us?

Left-wing activists described the year leading up to Barack Obama's election as exhilarating, empowering and exciting.
Now, if you ask progressives gathered for the America's Future Now conference in Washington, D.C., about the first year and a half of his presidency, they say:

"Frustrating."

"Sobering."

"Brutal."

At least, those were the reactions of, respectively, union activist Nick Weiner, University of Minnesota political science professor Dara Strolovitch, and Steve Peha, who heads an education reform consultancy.

"I had hoped for something different," Peha explains. "I had hoped for the president who ran for office, and not so much the one who's in office."

Peha says he's a pragmatist -- he knows that campaigning and governing are different. But "what I wish is that President Obama had worked a little less for his ideal of bipartisanship and a little more for the people who elected him," he says.

This is the prevailing feeling at this week's America's Future Now conference. And no one is hiding it.

There are several things to remark upon here.

One, the Obama administration has easily been the most partisan administration that this country has suffered through since Johnson. His "take it or leave it" strategy for ramming through his health-care scheme is example enough of that. On that charge, the progressives are talking out their ass. They wouldn't know what "bipartisanship" was if it reached across the isle and slugged them.

Two, Obama is the most progressive President this country has had since Woodrow Wilson. Again, his health-care scheme is proof enough of that. We could also talk about his high tax policy and his regulatory policy per Cap and Trade. Then there is that whole financial crises fiasco created by the progressive geniuses Barney Frank and Chris Dodd that Obama managed to make much worse. He even seized control of GM for goodness sake. GM is now a government run enterprise strait out of the Mussolini play book. What do the progressives want! Any more progressive and and this administration would be considering controlling political speech by taxing internet news aggregators or bringing back the "Fairness Doctrine" to radio.

Three, Obama cannot realistically satisfy his hard left supporters. These are the people on the fringe of reality, more inclined to look at working through the constraints of the law and the constitution as backsliding and evidence of a spiritual weakness. These people were going to turn on him no matter what. That doesn't mean that we can't enjoy the schadenfreude while watching his own snakes turn on him.

Heh. . . Here is some "Hope and Change" good and hard you "progressive" dip-shits.

An Economic Collapse in 2011?

Art Laffer discusses the predictable results of raising taxes.

See: Tax Hikes and the 2011 Economic Collapse

On or about Jan. 1, 2011, federal, state and local tax rates are scheduled to rise quite sharply. President George W. Bush's tax cuts expire on that date, meaning that the highest federal personal income tax rate will go 39.6% from 35%, the highest federal dividend tax rate pops up to 39.6% from 15%, the capital gains tax rate to 20% from 15%, and the estate tax rate to 55% from zero. Lots and lots of other changes will also occur as a result of the sunset provision in the Bush tax cuts.

Tax rates have been and will be raised on income earned from off-shore investments. Payroll taxes are already scheduled to rise in 2013 and the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) will be digging deeper and deeper into middle-income taxpayers. And there's always the celebrated tax increase on Cadillac health care plans. State and local tax rates are also going up in 2011 as they did in 2010. Tax rate increases next year are everywhere.

Now, if people know tax rates will be higher next year than they are this year, what will those people do this year? They will shift production and income out of next year into this year to the extent possible. As a result, income this year has already been inflated above where it otherwise should be and next year, 2011, income will be lower than it otherwise should be.

We are more broke then we know.

Economics is an exercise in dynamic behaviors. People change their spending, investing and working behaviors when the tax code is changed. They will make decisions with the purpose and intent of keeping as much of their money as possible.

Expect people to behave rationally, even if that means working less because they can keep less of what they earn.

Hat tip: LuciusSeptimius @ Correspondence Committee

Singling Out Israel

Two paragraphs that tell the tale.

From: Israel rejects call to join anti-nuclear treaty

Early in the article:

All 189 parties to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, including the United States, called on Friday in a declaration that singled out Israel for a conference in 2012 to discuss banning weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East.

Later in the article, the following is admitted:

Iran was not mentioned in the NPT declaration.

Significant.

Would a Republican Adminstration have participated in this farce? Something to think about when you vote.

Piracy On Falcon Lake - And Soon Off Of Our Gulf and Pacific Coasts

Pirates and American Victims (Someplace much closer than South East Asia or East Africa.)

See: Pirates threaten boats on US-Mexico border lake

ZAPATA, Texas (AP) - The waters of Falcon Lake normally beckon boaters with waterskiing and world-record bass fishing. But this holiday weekend, fishermen on the waters that straddle the U.S.-Mexico border are on the lookout for something more sinister: pirates.

Twice in recent weeks, fishermen have been robbed at gunpoint by marauders that the local sheriff says are "spillover" from fighting between rival Mexican drug gangs.

Boaters are concerned about their safety, and the president of the local Chamber of Commerce is trying to assure people that everything's fine on the U.S. side of the lake.

At the fishing camp his family has owned for 50 years, Jack Cox now sleeps with a loaded shotgun at his feet and a handgun within reach.

How long before this stuff hits our Pacific and Gulf Coast waters?

What would stop them?

Why should they expect any kind of action other than the inaction that they have already come to expect from us at our borders?

Mexico is in bad shape.

It's leaders snivel about US gun laws while Mexican Narco-Cartels have effectively taken control of large swaths of their county. They have let the drug-lords run free for so long that they now threaten to topple the Mexican government.

It is Columbia all over again. And it is just next door.

Illegal immigrants continue to flow across our porous border. Our cowardly government talks about sending troops to the border and then loudly proclaims that the troops are not going to do anything about the human waves of illegals crossing in from Mexico.

What a fucking farce.

Now we have a pirate problem to add to this mess.

Just a few fishing boats for now. But they will see that NOTHING will be done about it. It will look to the criminal element south of the border like a “Money for Nothing” scheme. They will say to themselves “The gringos won't do anything. They haven't the cajones.” Have they seen anything from us that would make them think differently?

Piracy on our near oceans will come of this if our nation continues to play weak.

The borders must be made secure. (Build the fucking wall already!)

The pirates must be killed.

Pirates must be hunted down, captured and killed. The killing of the pirates part is important. For pirates, this is something that must be done, especially on the salt waters, whether here off our southern coasts or across the world off of East Africa or South East Asia.

You have to kill pirates.

You have to protect your nation's borders.

Nations that don't do these things risk becoming someone else's country.

Public Employees Unions & Bankrupt Governments

We may soon see a wave of city and county governments file for bankruptcy in the near future. Bankruptcy gives the local municipal governments the means to deal with a significant source of their problems with their budgets.

See: Bankruptcy talk spreads among Calif. muni officials

Despite its stigma, bankruptcy has paid an important dividend for Vallejo: It has forced public employee unions to the negotiating table, providing city leaders an opportunity to rein in compensation, which city officials said accounts for more than three-quarters of Vallejo's general fund spending. City Councilwoman Stephanie Gomes said the effort has led to concessions from three of four city unions.

Like Vallejo, Los Angeles is suffering from weak revenue at the same time the cost of its pensions and other retirement benefits are rising. Former Mayor Richard Riordan said those factors put the government of the second largest U.S. city on track to declare bankruptcy between now and 2014.

Riordan sees bankruptcy as a necessary tactic for squeezing concessions from the city's public employee unions. It could also pave the way for 401(k) retirement accounts for new city workers instead of defined pension benefit plans with escalating costs, he said.

"The threat of bankruptcy is really the only way you're going to get them to make major changes," Riordan recently told Reuters.

The public employee's unions are the most powerful lobbies in existence. They own most (particularly the blue) local governments, lock, stock and barrel. They are an organized block of votes and campaign contributions that dominate local elections. They get their people out to vote. They control huge heaping gobs of money that get donated to (almost exclusively Democrat) campaigns. They are the deciding factor in blue districts. They own them.

The end result? The municipalities that have been generous with the compensation packages that they have given to their public employees unions are now broke. There is little or nothing left in the private sector to loot. Their economies are in the toilet, the rich are fleeing the state, and the low end private work force that remains earns next to nothing and pays next to nothing in taxes.

In such circumstances, filing bankruptcy can look like a good idea.

Too bad it won't work.

Dealing the unions a setback only leaves them in place to again manipulate elections so that they can again vote themselves ever larger portions of the public purse. So long as Public Employee Unions are able to influence local politicians, they will own those politicians. Nothing will really ever change.

~

See Also: Soak the Rich, Lose the Rich

We believe there are three unintended consequences from states raising tax rates on the rich. First, some rich residents sell their homes and leave the state; second, those who stay in the state report less taxable income on their tax returns; and third, some rich people choose not to locate in a high-tax state. Since many rich people also tend to be successful business owners, jobs leave with them or they never arrive in the first place. This is why high income-tax states have such a tough time creating net new jobs for low-income residents and college graduates.

See Also: Best and Worst States for Business 2010

How is it that the nation’s most populous state at 37 million, one that is the world’s eighth-largest economy and the country’s richest and most diverse agricultural producer, a state that had the fastest growth rate in the 1950s and 1960s during the tenures of Democratic Governor Pat Brown and Republican Governors Earl Warren and Ronald Reagan, should become the Venezuela of North America?

Californians pay among the highest income and sales taxes in the nation, the former exceeding 10 percent in the top brackets. Unemployment statewide is over 12.2 percent, higher than the national average. State politics seems consumed with how to divide a shrinking pie rather than how to expand it. Against national trend, union density is climbing from 16.1 percent of workers in 1998 to 17.8 percent in 2002. Organized labor has more political influence in California than in most other states. In addition, unfunded pension and health care liabilities for state workers top $500 billion and the annual pension contribution has climbed from $320 million to $7.3 billion in less than a decade. When state employees reach critical mass, they tend to become a permanent lobby for continual growth in government.

Are we having fun yet?

Hillery Clinton Talks About Brazil As A Taxation Model

See: Clinton: 'The rich are not paying their fair share'

"Brazil has the highest tax-to-GDP rate in the Western Hemisphere and guess what — they're growing like crazy," Clinton said. "And the rich are getting richer, but they're pulling people out of poverty."

Both Clinton and Obama campaigned for president on promises to allow the Bush tax cuts for wealthy Americans expire this year, a plan that is now part of Obama's budget. The move will effectively raise taxes sharply on people earning more than $250,000.

Hillery is clearly suggesting that Brazil's high tax rate is the reason that its economy is growing.

Brazil may have a high tax rate, but it also largely avoided the banking disaster that has put many other western nations on the brink of bankruptcy.

See: Lessons from Brazil: Why Is It Bouncing Back While Other Markets Stumble?

But all of Brazil's banks can be thankful that, to a large extent, they haven't had to deal with the toxic assets that crippled banks in developed countries. Unlike their counterparts elsewhere, Brazilian banks were not as exposed to the property sector and credit derivatives, and financial soundness indicators were robust coming into the crisis, according to Fabio Barbosa, head of Banco Santander Brasil and the Brazilian Federation of Banking Associations (Febraban). He cites the high capitalization requirement as a key reason for the sector's resilience -- the minimum capital adequacy requirement in Brazil is 11%, compared with 8% under the Basel regulations that other banks around the world follow. In December 2008, the average ratio for the sector in Brazil was 20%, and for the country's five largest banks (accounting for 67% of total assets) the ratio was 18.5%. He adds that Brazil also didn't have a shadow financial system, like in the U.S., thanks to tight regulatory and supervisory oversight. All financial institutions (including investment banks) are under the watch of the Central Bank.

One of Brazil's biggest advantages is that it did not have a Barney Frank or a Chris Dodd plundering it's banking system to redistribute wealth.

Comparatively, with the rest of the western world seeing their future play out for them in the street riots of Greece, Brazil is doing pretty good. It could do even better.

High tax rates reduce the private sectors ability to raise money for new projects, new ideas, new services, and new businesses. If Brazil were to reduce its tax rake to a lower level, productivity in their private sector would likely increase, which ironically enough, would also increase the amount of tax revenue that the government would be able to take in. Increasing the opportunity for the private sector to make money also increases the potential amount of taxable revenue that can be collected.

Conversely, if Brazil were to increase its tax rake even more than it is at present, it could expect to see an eventual decline in private sector productivity. Lower profits would reduce the amount of taxable revenue that the government could then skim out the publics pockets.

There is a point at which the tax rates can be raised high enough that the result would be reduced tax revenue to the Government. Right now, Brazil is in a boom period. They are making money. The high tax rate is not the reason that they are making money. It is just a factor that businesses in Brazil have to deal with, a hindrance that they have to overcome, a red-line that they have to pay for in their books.

In time, as their economy matures, that high tax rate of theirs will become more of a problem. Their politicians will either have the wit and the will to lower their tax rates which will increase profits and tax collections, or they will squeeze the public even harder with even higher taxes, which will reduce profits and reduce tax collections.

But to think that Brazil has somehow managed to tax itself into prosperity . . . is nuts.

"We Erect Courthouses For A Reason"

See: Wash. court: Jail trial unfair to murder defendant

James Frank Jaime was convicted of killing a man during a drug deal in 2005. The judge agreed with prosecutors who for security reasons wanted to hold his trial in a courtroom at the jail, rather than in the courthouse across the street.

In an opinion by Justice Debra Stephens, the high court ruled 6-3 Thursday that the setting was prejudicial, akin to letting jurors see the defendant in shackles, and that the judge did not analyze whether the security concerns were justified.

"We erect courthouses for a reason," Stephens wrote. "They are a stage for public discourse, a neutral forum for the resolution of civil and criminal matters. ... The use of a space other than a courthouse for a criminal trial, particularly when that space is a jailhouse, takes a step away from those dignities."

And a few paragraphs later:

That prompted a separate writing from Alexander, who noted that in many counties, the jails have been located on the top floor of the courthouse. Anyone entering the building gets the sense of being in a courthouse, not a jail, he said. That's not the case in the Yakima jail.

"There is a significant difference between a jail in a courthouse and a courtroom in a jailhouse," Alexander wrote.

[Emphasis is mine.]

I realize that many people would look at the defendent in the above mentioned instance and say "Just hang the bastard!" He may well deserve to hang. Had the trial and conviction taken place accross the street, we would likely never have heard of him or even give much of a damn about him and his trial. Setting his trial in the jail house was a mistake.

Jail implies guilt.

Inteligent people, some would argue, can look past the setting of the trial in and prevent themselves from allowing the location of the trial to bias their view of the defendant. This is a bad argument on several counts, two of them notable.

Firstly, intelligence does not prevent someone from being influenced by the settings and surroundings that they find themselves in. We are all human beings, influenced emotionally as well as intellectually by the events and circumstances that we find ourselves in. We are not Vulcans, emotionally detached or dead. Settings will affect how we "feel" about something, no matter how much we "think" about it.

Secondly, juries are comprised of our "peers." That is not "peers" as in people of the same intellectual caliber or social strata, but "peers" as in people picked almost completely at random from the community that they court serves. The odds of them all being "intelligent" enough to be able to ignore the setting that the trial is staged in is . . . well, its ridiculous. Only the delusional or those that have never actually met or dealt with the public could think that a Jury would always or even often be comprised of only "intelligent" jurors.

The stage and the setting that a trial takes place in needs to command the respect of the defendants, the juries and the public at large. It must also be neutral. The defendant deserves to have a fair trial. The public needs the trials to be fair so that it can be certain that the convictions and the acquittals that result are sound and proper, even if they may not be the emotionally desired outcome.

In this case, holding the trial for this defendant in the jail was a mistake.

Federal Courthouses Should Command Respect.

Our Federal government has spent itself into a huge gaping hole.

There will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth as scape-goats are sought to be slaughtered as offerings on the alter of public opinion.

We can see an example of this happening now with a new report that has come out that complains about the costs of building Federal Courthouses.

See: Building oversize federal courts wastes millions

Federal courthouses built larger than necessary have cost taxpayers $835 million in wasted construction funds since 2000 while the extra space requires $51 million annually to maintain, the Government Accountability Office told a congressional committee on Tuesday.

The GAO found that the 33 courthouses or courthouse annexes completed in the past decade contain 3.56 million square feet of unnecessary space, said Mark L. Goldstein, the GAO's director of physical infrastructure issues.

Larger than necessary? That is the value judgment of someone that does not understand the role of the courthouse in making the law worthy of respect.

Should a Federal Courthouse be a grand and impressive structure? Or should it be a cheap and unremarkable building?

This is not a trivial mater.

Some may argue that over-sized and overbuilt courthouses are a waste of money. They make a serious if not a fatal mistake when the think this.

The over-sized courthouse, with its high ceilings, stone walls and polished marble floors set the stage for the ritual, the ceremony, the drama and the consequence of the law. People's lives and property are at stake in these buildings. In such halls, people's fortunes are saved or destroyed. Even their very lives can be at stake, balanced on the fulcrum of evidence and the rod of the law, with their freedom or death to be decided by judge and jury.

There is a certain stage-craft to the law. It must command respect. Its edifices and facilities should and really must convey to those that are made to stand before it in judgment and appeal, the full majesty of the law as well as the might and authority of the state.

There is ritual and ceremony in the adjudication of the law. There is also the stage that the ceremony and the ritual is set. The ceremony, the ritual and the stage make the legal process stand apart and separate from the everyday events of working, shopping or playing that we all engage in our daily lives. The seriousness of the ritual, the ceremony and the stage that the law is dispensed in can help make it respectable, or help make it a farce.

Think about what a different perception we would have of the law if it was dispensed from triple-wide mobile-home type structures. Can you picture it? Imagine the nine justices of the Supreme Court trying to be taken seriously in a low ceilinged room with plastic coated fake wood paneling.

The law must be respected. Having it dispensed from buildings that scream “cheap” and “disposable” does not make the government that it represents worthy of respect.

Our government is not going broke because it is building grand courthouses. It is going broke because it has turned away from being a protector of rights to a dispenser of welfare benefits. The welfare state is bleeding us dry, not over-sized courthouses.

This may seem like a small thing to some people, but it is not a small thing.

Again, think about how much respect you would have for a court system that was run from disposable buildings. How can you take the legal system of a government seriously that thought its laws should be adjudicated in courthouses that were no more impressive or respectable than trailers in a mobile-home park?

Raise Taxes Or Cut Spending – Two World-views

Democrats in California have put together a plan to tax California out of their spending problems. They can't afford what they have promised, so they will take more from the productive to finance their shortfall.

See: California Democrats unveil tax-increase package

The plan by state Senate Democrats would raise $4.9 billion by raising California's vehicle registration fee, suspending corporate tax breaks scheduled to begin next year and boosting the state's tax on alcoholic beverages.

Democrats control both chambers of the state's legislature and have said they would seek new revenue to help plug the shortfall.

Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, by contrast, has ruled out tax increases and is relying largely on deep spending cuts in his plan for balancing the state's books. He has called for $12.4 billion of cuts and would scrap the state's welfare system, a plan Democrats have rejected.

Arnold Schwarzenegger's approach would be to cut spending as the best means to solve the state's spending problem. Arnold may not be the best representative of Republican philosophy, but in this example, he does so well.

For Democrats, raising taxes to solve an over-spending problem is the right thing to do because of the good intentions that drive their want to spend. They really do believe that raising taxes on the productive is a good way to support the poor and the disadvantaged that they want to help.

For Republicans, raising taxes to solve a spending problem is a little bit to much like shooting up with heroin in order to solve a drug problem. Its nuts. It only makes things worse. Reducing the incentive for the productive to produce will not only reduce how many people that the productive can employee, but it will also reduce the amount of profit that they will have that can be taxed. Everybody loses.

The road to hell is paved with . . .

Bitter Resentments And The Death Of The Euro.

All the happy talk in the world from bloviating socialist economist can not stem the tide that is turning against the Euro.

In Germany, the Euro is becoming the butt of bad jokes that are funny only because of the truth that they tell.

See: Berliners dream of return to deutschmark

Cabaret artists have been making jokes about wheelbarrows of notes, or telling the one about the German and the Greek who go out to eat, the German choosing the cheapest item on the menu, the Greek gorging on a range of dishes, before the waiter brings the German the bill at the end. The audience doubles over. But the reality is stomach-churning.

"We are building up an almighty bubble of debt which is going to burst in one great bang," says Hans-Werner Sinn, chief of Ifo, one of the country's leading economic thinktanks.

That means a bitter round of budget cuts, deeper than any seen since 1945. Every area of German life is expected to take a hit, from education to welfare benefits, swimming pools to autobahns. Far-fetched as talk of the return of the mark seems, the more it is talked about, the more it is likely to become popular, despite Merkel's insistence that if the euro fails, so will Europe.

Without Germany, the Euro is nothing. The Germans know it. All of Europe knows it. The resentment in Germany is real. Resentment like this will kill the Euro.

Europe – Retiring On Empty?

See: Crisis Imperils Liberal Benefits Long Expected by Europeans

In Rome, Aldo Cimaglia is 52 and teaches photography, and he is deeply pessimistic about his pension. “It’s going to go belly-up because no one will be around to fill the pension coffers,” he said. “It’s not just me; this country has no future.”

Changes have now become urgent. Europe’s population is aging quickly as birthrates decline. Unemployment has risen as traditional industries have shifted to Asia. And the region lacks competitiveness in world markets.

According to the European Commission, by 2050 the percentage of Europeans older than 65 will nearly double. In the 1950s there were seven workers for every retiree in advanced economies. By 2050, the ratio in the European Union will drop to 1.3 to 1.

1.3 workers to every 1 retiree. That is not workable. The poor workers paying into the system will have to be taxed at over half their gross just to keep the system going. They won't do it. They will quit. Quiting will easily look like the best option. “Better,” the workers will rationalize, “to go on the dole then have to be the sucker that pays for it.”

European politicians knew that this day was coming. They knew that their welfare state was based on Ponzi scheme economics. It was the reason that they opened their borders to immigrants from Muslim nations. They had hoped that these new immigrants would help them maintain a high worker to retiree ratio. They had also hoped that the new immigrants would feel invested in the success of Europe and in the welfare of those that they would be supporting in retirement. (Can we say - Epic Fail!)

What then for Europe?

Can they find a way out of this catastrophe?

It may be too late for them.

But what about for us?

Is our social welfare system really that much better off than the European's? Or are we seeing in Europe, a harbinger of our own doom?

The Next Big Bailouts - State Pension Plans

Hold on to your wallets.

See: Will State Pension Funds Need a $1 Trillion Bailout?

The federal government could face another economic disaster and massive bailouts within a decade if it doesn't force state pension funds to revamp their operations soon, an economist says.

Even if they meet "aggressive" 8 percent growth targets, several states will see the reserves in their pension funds dry up by the end of 2020, with many more running out of cash within another decade, says Joshua Rauh, an economist at Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Management. Broke states are likely to go begging to the federal government, which would probably have to bail them out to the tune of more than $1 trillion, he argues in a new paper.

It is important to keep in mind how big of a deal this is. The beneficiaries of these state pension funds are very powerful politically. These are government employees. They own the government. It is their play-toy. (Government employees are the most powerful lobby in any government.)

You will be told to just shut up and pay.

More debt. More taxes. Are we having fun yet?

See also: State Pensions Face $1 Trillion Shortfall

Is The Medicare System Beginning To Implode? How Will Politicians Respond?

How will politicians respond if the Doctors refuse to participate in the Government medical care schemes?

See: Texas doctors opting out of Medicare at alarming rate

Texas doctors are opting out of Medicare at alarming rates, frustrated by reimbursement cuts they say make participation in government-funded care of seniors unaffordable.

Two years after a survey found nearly half of Texas doctors weren't taking some new Medicare patients, new data shows 100 to 200 a year are now ending all involvement with the program. Before 2007, the number of doctors opting out averaged less than a handful a year.

“This new data shows the Medicare system is beginning to implode,” said Dr. Susan Bailey, president of the Texas Medical Association. “If Congress doesn't fix Medicare soon, there'll be more and more doctors dropping out and Congress' promise to provide medical care to seniors will be broken.”

How long before some Congress Critter proposes forcing Doctors to accept Medicare (think Obama-care) patients at whatever compensation rate the government sets?

Review: A Voyage For Madmen

A Voyage For Madmen

I just finished reading it.

I am sure this kind of thing is not everybody's cup of tea. Books about sailing are rarely exciting. This one is.

Nine men set out on the race. One man finished it. He returned a hero, surviving not only the voyage, but its aftermath as well. While some dropped out of the race for sensible and sound reasons, others continued and were ultimately destroyed by it.

I liked it. Though I must confess that I found it a little troubling. The sailors involved ran the gamut of the "distressingly normal" to the mad and the doomed. It was too easy to see a bit of myself in all of them.

It is always pleasant enough to be able to find spiritual kinship with the heroic and transcendental. We all want to believe that we have the nerve and the will to do what is right and just even if only God is there with us as our witness. It can be a little unnerving to find in the faults and failings of others more of yourself then you would wish.

I recommend A Voyage For Madmen, but with caution.

23,000 Nautical Miles

Jessica Watson is home after seven months at sea. Seven months without stopping anywhere along the way.

See: Australian teen completes round-the-world sail

The route took Watson through some of the world's most treacherous waters, and the teen battled through monstrous storms, suffering seven knockdowns.

Watson said she had moments of doubt during those times, but generally kept her spirits up.

"Amazingly, I just enjoyed it much, much more than I ever thought I would and handled the challenges better than I thought," she told journalists. "You don't actually have a choice - you're in the middle of a storm, you're being knocked down - you can't fall apart."

Joshua Slocum was the first person to sail solo around the world. His was a much more leisurely passage. He was not in a hurry. His trip took over 3 years.

Many others have followed in Slocum's wake. Some have done it to be the first, the youngest, the fastest or for any other of a number of reasons.

Few seize the opportunity to complete an audacious achievement. Fewer still succeed. We can celebrate the courage and the daring to do a great thing. We can celebrate those that succeed.

Jessica Watson has succeeded.

Her effort and her success are worth celebrating.

Good work Jessica.

What Happens When They Run Out Of Other Peoples Money To Spend?

Spending other peoples money can be a lot of fun . . . until the money runs out.

See: Illinois deep in debt, doesn’t pay bills

Paralyzed by the worst deficit in its history, the state has fallen months behind in paying what it owes to businesses and organizations, pushing some of them to the edge of bankruptcy.

Illinois isn't bothering with the formality of issuing IOUs, as California did last year. It simply doesn't pay.

Think about that.

That is not a small thing.

All of those vendors that are not being paid have employees that may soon be out of a job because their employers can not get paid.

How many other State and City governments are going to have this problem? How many people will lose their jobs, their careers and their life savings when their employer's government customers fail to pay their bills?

Greece - Economic Liberalization And Removing The State From The Market Place

See: The Bitter Pills in the Plan to Rescue Greece

Another reform high on the list is removing the state from the marketplace in crucial sectors like health care, transportation and energy and allowing private investment. Economists say that the liberalization of trucking routes — where a trucking license can cost up to $90,000 — and the health care industry would help bring down prices in these areas, which are among the highest in Europe.

Note how in this paragraph, "liberalization" refers to "removing the state from the marketplace."

Greece is in such bad shape, they are considering taking two steps back in order to take one step forward.

Not to worry though. One of the proposals is to have Greece increase its Value Added Tax (VAT) up to 25%. That is a high enough rake off of the private sector to insure that no real economic recovery will come of anything inadvertently positive that could be imposed.

There is no easy solution for Greece or for any other nation that is suffering from the all to predictable results of running out of other peoples money to spend. You can't spend what you don't have. Resorting to debt will only make the problem bigger. Resorting to raising taxes will only cripple that part of the economy that creates wealth. Freeing the economy from government regulation and taxation could work but it can not rescue welfare-state socialism from its all to predictable and inevitibly destructive results.

Bottem line, Socialism Sucks.

Roller Coaster Market Ride - Are We Having Fun Yet?

See: Bank Risk Soars to Record, Default Swaps Overtake Lehman Crisis

May 7 (Bloomberg) -- The cost of insuring against losses on European bank bonds soared to a record, surpassing levels triggered by the collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., as the sovereign debt crisis deepened.

Like on an old wooden roller coaster, our economic cars have been pulled slowly to the top again after the first plunge, tickity tickity tickity all the way up.

Now, here we are at the the top of the second rise, at the long breathless moment where the cars just kind of sit there, slipping slowly forward as we get our first look at the deep drop before us. No more tickity tickity. The brakes are now off.

In moments, there will be little that we can do but throw our hands up in the air and scream in the downward plunge.

Are we having fun yet?

Do You Need A "Smoking Gun?"

See: Evidence Mounts for Taliban Role in Car Bomb Plot

One senior Obama administration official cautioned that “there are no smoking guns yet” that the Pakistani Taliban had directed the Times Square bombing. But others said that there were strong indications that Mr. Shahzad knew some members of the group and that they probably had a role in training him.

In a video on Sunday, the Pakistani Taliban claimed responsibility for the attempted bombing.

Before 911, there was a problem with connecting the dots.

After 911, there was an outcry of rage over the fact that the dots were not connected.

Smoking guns and connecting the dots.

In the world of 910, we thought like lawyers, needing rock solid irrefutable evidence in order to "Connect the Dots."

Is it 910 all over again?

The Partisan Dividing Line On Illegal Immigration

The question that will play out over the coming months will be: “Are the Democrats now the Party of Illegal Immigration?”

One Democrat candidate for Senate in California has charged that the “Democrat Elite” are manipulating today's May Day/Pro-Amnesty Protesters to push an unpopular reform package that includes Amnesty for Illegal aliens.

See his Press Release: Democrats Are Manipulating the Marchers

"There is not going to be an amnesty this year, or next year. The majority of the American people don't want it, for good reason. They want to secure the borders first," he said. "Amnesty before we secure the borders would only encourage yet another wave of illegals and hurt the wages of unskilled Americans (and legal immigrants)."

"But every time Democratic politicians in D.C. need to rev up the Latino vote, they dangle the false promise of an amnesty bill. At some point. Latino voters are going to realize they're being used."

Kaus is the only Democratic Senate candidate on the ballot to oppose amnesty proposals, even when they are packaged with enforcement measures and billed as "comprehensive reform." The incumbent, Barbara Boxer, supports "comprehensive reform" that includes a "path to citizenship" for illegals--i.e., amnesty.

"It's time Democrat politicians stopped holding enforcement measures hostage to their goal of amnesty--of giving citizenship to millions who are here illegally."

"We need to secure the borders first. Build the actual, physical fence that was supposed to be built. Extend E-verify or another effective means of checking immigration status at the time of employment. Create a system for monitoring visa overstays. Let the ACLU sue. Let the Chamber of Commerce sue. Let MALDEF sue. Then if the system survives those assaults, and works--actually stops illegal immigration and sends a signal to the world that the game has changed--then in a few years we can start to talk about amnesty."

"Until then it's a false promise, a fraud."

What Democrat Candidate for Senate, running in California of all places, would have the courage to say such things? Mickey Kaus. Yes, Mickey Kaus of Kausfiles.com. Mickey Kaus has also recently received the endorsement of Victor Davis Hanson.

An Ezra Klein piece in the Washington Post discusses this issue and the poll numbers.

See: Like it or not, the 2010 election is now (substantially) about immigration

The Democrats' immigration plan is based on a simple compromise: Restrictionists get increased border security, reformers get a path to legalization. And the compromise is in that order, too: The legalization path doesn't kick in until eight separate security benchmarks are met (head here for an excellent summary).

The question is whether anyone wants this compromise, at least right now. Consider this: The Arizona plan is popular. According to Gallup, 51 percent of Americans who have heard of the law support it. Only 39 percent oppose the legislation.

This is an issue the divides the public in lines that are very difficult to cross.

Have the Democrats become the Party of Illegal Imigration? With a few rare indivdual exceptions like Kaus and Hanson, the answer seems to be an obvious and overwhelming "Yes."

The elections will get very interesting. If you think that Amnesty is an issue that can wait until real and meaningful measures are in place to secure the borders and enforce our immigration laws, be prepared to be called a Racist by the welfare pimps and whores on the left. The Race-Card is the only card they have on this issue. They will play it for all that its worth.

Leftist Bad-Crazy On Arizona Immigration Law Enforcement

See: How to fight Arizona's misguided immigration law

An Arizona Legislature dominated by crazies -- they're birthers, they've allowed people to pack concealed weapons into restaurants, and axed a health insurance program for poor kids -- has just made it a crime to be an illegal immigrant in the Grand Canyon State. Law enforcement officers are now required to demand papers from anyone they suspect to be in the country illegally.

This may come as a shock to Mr. Connelly and other fringe-kook leftist like him but it is already illegal to be be an illegal immigrant in the Grand Canyon State as well as in all of the other 49 states.

This is an illustration of why the situation has gotten so out of control that states like Arizona have decided that they can no longer count on the Federal Government to be an agent of Justice and must take the matter into their own hands.

Arizona and other states that may follow in its footsteps would not have to go to the such extraordinary steps if the Federal Government was enforcing the law instead of playing politics with peoples lives.

An Important NYT Op-Ed Explaining The Arizona Immigration Law

There will be an incredible amount of spin and outright bullshit from the Democrats and their fellow travelers on the hard left about Arizona's Immigration Law.

See: Why Arizona Drew a Line

State governments aren’t allowed to get involved in immigration, which is a federal matter. While it is true that Washington holds primary authority in immigration, the Supreme Court since 1976 has recognized that states may enact laws to discourage illegal immigration without being pre-empted by federal law. As long as Congress hasn’t expressly forbidden the state law in question, the statute doesn’t conflict with federal law and Congress has not displaced all state laws from the field, it is permitted. That’s why Arizona’s 2007 law making it illegal to knowingly employ unauthorized aliens was sustained by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

This Op-Ed is a good resource to use as this subject comes up around the water-cooler.

HT: (UFO TOFO, See #108) at Correspondence Committee

"The Single Most Critical Senate Election In The United States"

Dick Morris weighs in on the upcoming Washington State Senate Race.

See: Commentator says Washington State Senate race critical for republicans

Morris says Rossi is a potential candidate to fill one of the ten seats republicans are aiming for.

"There's no point in building a nine-story building here, because if we only gain nine seats (Vice President Joe) Biden breaks the tie for the Democrats 50-50, but if we win 10, it's 51-49 and there's nothing he can do about it."

"I think it is the single most critical senate election in the United States because I believe that we're going to win the other nine and the question is, will this be the tenth?" Morris said.

Washington is a blue state. Our politics are dominated by King County (Seattle). Patty Murray will win in King County. The key will be by how much.

East of the Cascades, Washington is red. West, it is blue. West of Seattle, it is light blue, meaning that it could be swung.

I like Rossi.

This will be a fun race.

HT: (JCM -See #100) at Correspondence Committee

Should American Immigration Law Be Enforced?

We are being put to the test.

Should American Immigration Law be enforced? Do any of our laws mean anything beyond the capricious whims of the momentary elite?

These are the questions that Arizona has put to the nation.

The Democrat-Left would like to make it an issue of race. Will they succeed in confusing the enforcement of our immigration laws with racism?

We will see over the next several days and months if Americans will be cowed by the fear of being called racist by the welfare pimps and whores in our midst, or if the Rule of Law will be respected and upheld as a core principle that guides our nation.

If the the concept of Rule of Law is subverted by the welfare pimps and whores of the Democrat-Left, we will be left with a nation that pretends to respect the law, but in fact bends to the Rule of Men.

Democrat Patty Murray's Grim Poll Numbers Look Good For Republicans

Washington State's Senator, Patty Murray's poll numbers are looking bleak for her in the upcoming election.

See: Bad Polling News For Murray

SurveyUSA has surfaced to poll the Washington Senate race, and finds some unpleasant news for incumbent Patty Murray (4/19/10-4/22/10, 517 LV, MOE: +/- 4.4%). She fails to get above 46% against any of her opponents, and does so a polled electorate that looks an awful lot like the 2008 electorate.

Patty Murray (D) -- 42%

Dino Rossi (R) -- 52%


Patty Murray (D) -- 46%

Don Benton (R) -- 44%


Patty Murray (D) -- 46%

Clint Didier (R) -- 44%


Patty Murray (D) -- 45%

Chris Widener (R) -- 43%


Patty Murray (D) -- 45%

Paul Akers (R) -- 44%


Patty Murray (D) -- 45%

Art Coday (R) – 41%

It is still early in the game.

The MOE (Margin of Error) is an important number to look at. With this number at +/- 4.4%, only Dino Rossi has a clear lead. All of the others are too close to the MOE to be more than just hopeful.

Akers and Coday are running radio spots. If there are any TV spots out there, I have not seen them. (I don't have a TV.)

Akers' spots are pretty good. Coday's are OK.

If Rossi gets in the race, he has enough of a following to pretty much guarantee him the nomination. Rossi also looks good in front of the camera.

Chinese War Ships Play War Games Near Japan

There are many possible flash points in the world. One that does not often get much attention or taken very seriously is the friction between China and Japan.

The Chinese Navy is engaged in War Game Exercises in the waters between China and Japan.

See: China defends its drills in East China Sea

China defended on Thursday its drills in East China Sea, saying that its naval ships out in the East China Sea did not violate international laws and posed no threat to other countries.

Japanese media have alleged that two Chinese submarines and eight destroyers were spotted circling Japan's Okinotori coral reefs.

The Second Sino War still looms large on the Chinese Psyche, especially since it is often used as a propaganda tool to keep the Chinese people from looking too closely at how awful the Chinese government treats its own people.

Japan is not entirely an innocent here. Japanese denial of its role in the atrocities that its armies perpetrated in the Second Sino War have made it an easy target for the Communist Chinese Propagandist to make hay with.

The Second Sino War?

Whats that you ask?

You say you were not taught about that in your US Government School Education?

Hint: Japan bombed Pearl Harbor to keep the US from being able to interfere in the Second Sino War. They thought that we were weak enough militarily and weak enough of will that we would not have the means or the gumption to do much about it. (Projecting weakness is dangerous.)

Odds are that nothing will happen during this present confrontation. China and Japan have had these confrontations from time to time without the world blowing up. Most likely, this confrontation will conclude with little more than the usual angry diplomatic protests and press releases. But we should not pretend that if something does happen, it won't end up involving us.

(What would Obama do if China and Japan were to get into another shooting war?)

Israel, Existential Threats And The Loss Of American Support

See: Mood Is Dark as Israel Marks 62nd Year as a Nation

“There is a confluence of two very worrying events,” said Michael Freund, a rightist columnist for The Jerusalem Post in a telephone interview. “One is the Iranian threat, an existential threat. Add to that the fact that for the first time in recent memory there is a president in the White House who is not overly sensitive to the Jewish state and its interests. You put the two together and it will affect anyone’s mood, even an optimist like me.”

Obama's and the American Left's failure to be supportive of Israel will have serious repercussions. Serious meaning war and bloodshed.

The Islamic nations that surround Israel had been largely reluctant to attack Israel because of the support that Israel received from the US. That support is now tepid at best.

Syria's recent gift of SCUD missiles to Hizb'Allah is an indicator of what the future holds in store for Israel. Hizb'Allah will have these weapons of terror at their disposal. Can the same Hizb'Allah that has already fired thousands of rockets into Israel resist the temptation to likewise launch their SCUDS into Israel? If so, for how long? Would you hazard a guess at one month or two? One year or two? Can you even imagine that Hizb'Allah will sit on their SCUDS and not fire them?

When war comes to Israel, what will Obama do? With whom will have the most sympathy? If Obama sides with Israel's enemies, what will you do?

We will have to prepare ourselves for that test.

Hizb'Allah, Syria And The Forces Of War.

This may be a hot summer in the middle east.

See: Israel warns Syria over Hezbollah attacks

Israel has delivered a secret warning to Syrian President Bashar Assad that it will respond to missile attacks from Hezbollah, the militant Lebanese-based Islamist group, by launching immediate retaliation against Syria itself.

If Syria delivered SCUD Missiles to Hizb'Allah in Lebanon as reports in the media indicate, then we may be looking at a summer war, with Israel going up against Hizb'Allah in Lebanon and the Syrian Government itself.

Peace between Israel and its neighbors now hinges on the restraint of Hizb'Allah. Can Hizb'Allah sit there with their new SCUDs and not fire them into Israel?

What will Obama do when the shooting starts? Who will he support? Who will he condemn?

Understanding Poland, Russia And The Horrors Of The Katyn Forests.

Chance and happenstance are sometimes very difficult to accept.

There will be conspiracy theories put forth to explain this terrible tragedy. It is unfortunate. It will not be helpful.

We live in an age where conspiracy theories are a dime a dozen. People seem to find comfort in the thought that bad and terrible things happen because someone or some group of people “conspired” to make them happen.

That bad and terrible things can happen for just plain inane, stupid, or silly reasons, or worse, no reason at all, means that chance and happenstance have more of a role in the currents of history than many people can stand.

For many, simple pilot error will not, can not, be enough. This is too monumental an event. It's timing and location are too significant to be just a mater of simple pilot error.

Sometimes, very bad things happen for no good reason. Sometimes, these things happen in what turn out to be the worst possible circumstance, at the worst possible place, and at the worst possible time - by no one's design. Sometimes, life is just like that. This is one such example.

Chance, Happenstance and cruel reality.

The crash that killed Polish President Lech Kaczynski and so many of Poland's top tier political leaders is a monumental catastrophe. It could not have happened on a worse patch of Russian ground.

The Katyn Forests are the site of a terrible event in Polish and Russian history. In that dark place, over a half century ago, Russia massacred about 22,000 Polish prisoners of war. The prisoners were largely Polish military officers and police officers. Among them were also many Polish political prisoners held by the Soviets. This terrible place, this horrible forest of death, this killing ground of Poland's best and brightest of the 1940's, is a sore and festering wound in the Polish psyche. It still haunts Poland's relations with modern day Russia.

To lose Poland's present day political leaders in this forest now is very terrible. It is terrible for Poland, and terrible for Russia.

Vladimir Putin is a not a nice man. Putin is trying to stay in power, trying to keep Russia from failing and trying to keep Russia relevant and important on the world stage. He is a brutal and thuggish leader of a nation in decline.

The Russian birth rate is so far below replacement rate that it's population is likely to be halved before the end of this century.

Russia is surrounded by hostile nations to the west that resent having been ill treated under the iron boot of the Soviet Empire.

To Russia's south are hostile Islamic nations, Chechnya included, that would love to feast on the rotting corpse of an enfeebled and weak Russia. They are hungry and they have growing populations. Russia will not be able to resist them much in the later part of this century. Russia simply won't have the numbers. When Russia loses the will and the means to hold off the wolves to it's south, they may be able to keep Moscow, if they are lucky. The Rest of Russia will be in dire peril.

Putin has been playing a hard game with the former east block states. He has worked very hard to weaken their resolve and to deny them the means to defend themselves against Russia. It has made relations between Russia and the former east block states unpleasant. But so long as nothing really terrible happens between Russia and the east block states, keeping them militarily weak is worth the price to the Russians of a few harsh words and the hurt feelings of the former east block states.

Then that plane crashed in the worst possible place.

Putin immediately knew that the crash was a terrible event. His quick action to declare himself the head of the investigation into the crash is his attempt to put Russia's best face forward on this disaster. He knows that it has the potential to strain already difficult relations with that former and very resentful east block state. Putin knows that the Poles have little reason to have anything but hatred and contempt for Russia. Now he has their dead President and most of Poland's leaders lying freshly dead in a new smoldering hole in the Katyn Forest.

Keeping the former east block states in check is difficult enough in normal times without having a stark and vivid reminder of how badly they have all fared at Russia's hands in the not so distant past.

I would imagine that in his memoirs, Putin will say that this was one of his worst days.

Russian Air-Crash Kills President of Poland

Many prominent Polish leaders were on the plane with him. There were no survivors.

See: Polish President Lech Kaczynski dies in plane crash

See: A nation in mourning: Poland's president and wife among at least 88 dead as their plane crashes in Russia

See: Poland in shock as president dies in air crash

Can The Federal Government Mandate That You Buy A Private Product?

Washington State's Attorney General will be making the argument that it can't. A surprisingly supportive editorial from the left of center Seattle Times editorial board explains.

See: AG Rob McKenna has a case to challenge the health-care law's individual mandate

The main challenge here is on one point — whether the federal government can require people to buy a private product: health insurance.

The argument centers on the U.S. Constitution's commerce clause, which gives Congress the power "to regulate Commerce ... among the several States ... " The lawsuit argues that requiring a citizen to buy insurance goes beyond regulating commerce. It is, says McKenna, "forcing people into the stream of commerce."

The law calls its mandate a tax. But if you comply, your money goes to the insurance company. You pay the government only if you don't comply — which means, McKenna says, "It's not a tax. It's a fine."

We think McKenna has a good case, and one the progressives who condemn him ought to appreciate. These critics are so often right about the dangers of corporate power, and particularly the rapacity of insurance companies.

Click on the link – Read the whole editorial.

I am hopeful that Rob McKenna and the other states Attorney Generals will make a good case before the Court.

The Coming Commercial Real Estate Crash

You may have noticed a lot of empty store fronts in your neighborhood strip malls. If those empty spaces give you any kind of uneasy pause or sense of concern, your instincts are sound. Something terrible is happening in the quiet corners of the nation's economy.

Commercial Real Estate is about to become big news. Very big news.

Lets look at a news article that appeared recently in the Seattle Times.

See: Columbia Center misses mortgage payment

The Columbia Center is Seattle's tallest skyscraper. It is the city's flagship office tower. A tall slender structure of black glass and steel, it rises high above all of Seattle's other offices buildings.

And nearly half of it is now available for rent.

Bottom line!: The new owners of the building are totally screwed.

When Beacon bought the Columbia Center in April 2007 it was 89 percent leased. The firm paid $621 million, according to county records, and borrowed a total of $480 million to help pay for the tower.

Its assessed value now is $380 million.

"There are many buildings in a similar position where the loan is greater than the value of the building," said Craig Kinzer of Seattle-based Kinzer Real Estate Services.

That is a world of butt-hurt.

That is also only one of many of the large office towers in this city.

The office towers are not alone in their problems. Residential rents in the Seattle area are at historic lows.

See: Renters, rejoice: Apartments are cheap and the iPod is free

After peaking in 2006 and 2007, rents in King, Snohomish and Pierce counties tanked over the course of last year by nearly 4 percent, according to Scott. He expects rents will continue to plummet this year by 5 percent, and again in 2011, but less dramatically.

In Seattle, property managers say that trend has been more pronounced, with some rents dropping as much as 15 to 20 percent last year. In general, higher-priced units have had biggest rent reductions. Bart Flora, co-owner of Cornell & Associates, which manages 6,500 properties in the city, said some, in-city, one-bedroom apartment now rent for $800 to $850, instead of roughly $1,000 two years ago.

"It's the steepest drop I've ever encountered in 25 years, certainly in my career," said Flora. He added that he believed the market - at least in Seattle - appears to have hit bottom and is stabilizing.

(Stablizing? Not even close buddy. There is a whole lot more bottom to hit.)

Now think about what all of that means, not only to the landlords of both the office towers and the apartment buildings, but also about what it means to the municipal coffers. When there is no money to tax . . .

Seattle is screwed.

And its not alone.

Look around.

What do you see happening in your city?

See: Half of Commercial Mortgages to Be Underwater: Warren

By the end of 2010, about half of all commercial real estate mortgages will be underwater, said Elizabeth Warren, chairperson of the TARP Congressional Oversight Panel, in a wide-ranging interview on Monday.

“They are [mostly] concentrated in the mid-sized banks,” Warren told CNBC. “We now have 2,988 banks—mostly midsized, that have these dangerous concentrations in commercial real estate lending."

As a result, the economy will face another “very serious problem” that will have to be resolved over the next three years, she said, adding that things are unlikely to return to normalcy in 2010.

Soon, the quiet corners of our economy are going to come screaming down around all of our ears.

HT: 3Wood at CC

Dying For A Glass Of Water

See: Dying Patient Was Refused A Glass Of Water

Ruth Sauter, the patient's daughter, said she was disgusted by the treatment her father had received.

She told The Daily Mail: "His condition was not life threatening, and nurses had specific instructions to keep close tabs on him.

"'But their appalling lack of care, and cruel behaviour killed my father...It's so much worse knowing that he died alone, thirsty and scared on that ward."

After being admitted in the morning, he was given antibiotics and oxygen, but was later forced to ring his wife to tell her that he was not allowed any more water as he had earlier knocked over a cup.

After ringing the switchboard, a doctor was called to the ward, only for a nurse to tell him that the patient was "overreacting".

This is a product of the English socialized medicine scheme.

It is important to keep in mind that in a socialized medicine scheme, the patient is not the customer. The real customer is the political-class that runs the socialized health-care administrative bureaucracy.

The patient is little more than a notation in a budget allocation.

Trusting your health to the benevolence and competence of politicians and bureaucrats is insane.

~~~
[Update]

FinallyFree at CC Found another article on the same subject. It goes into a little more detail then the one that I found.

See: Dying hospital patient phoned switchboard begging for a drink after nurses said 'No'

Global Warming Activists And The Rising Sea Level Lie

One type of Environmental Scientific Charlatanism is to hype Anthropogenic Global Warming as a cause for some notable environmental change when another far less frightening and very natural cause might actually be the source.

We can see an example of this in a report on the sinking of New Moore Island.

See: New Moore Island Sinks From Global Warming

New Moore Island has been sinking for 30 years. However, the island itself, known as New Moore, is no more. In fact, it's now completely submerged under water.

Scientists used satellite imagery to prove their point. Moreover, sea patrols have confirmed that New Moore Island has sunk. Now the Global Warming experts say it's because of Climate Change.

However, the fact is, the island has been sinking dramatically during the past decade. Global Warming experts claim that the sea level is rising in accordance with rising temperatures. The island is about two square miles.

The island itself could be the first of many islands to soon disappear. Reports say that around 10 other islands are at risk of being submerged by rising waters. It is either caused by rising sea levels or the island itself might be sinking in mud.

Note how even the headline for article at this link declares Global Warming to be the cause of the island's sinking.

It is bullshit. More to the point, it is a lie.

There is something very interesting about New Moore Island that is alluded to only in passing in that article, as if it shouldn't be given much thought. The key to understanding what is happening to New Moore Island gets an oblique half sentence mention in the fifth paragraph of the article " . . .or the island itself might be sinking in mud." In another half sentence, several paragraphs later, the island's “geological instability” is sited as the reason why neither India nor Bangladesh established permanent settlements on the island.

Sinking in mud?

Geological instability?

The article gives the truth of the mater the most casual and off hand treatment. Global Warming is hyped hysterically but the importance of the geological makeup of the island and its role in the the life of the island is all but ignored.

New Moore Island is a sandbar. The Island is made up of alluvial silts and muds flowing out of the Ganges-Brahmaputra Delta. In other words, it is not the kind of island that should be thought of as a stable land mass. New Moore Island is just sinking under its own weight, which is within the norm for sandbars. Sandbars are by their very nature, ephemeral structures, existing for fleeting geological moments at the whims of nature's tides, waves, winds and storms.

While the sea level itself may also rise and fall of its own accord, it would be irresponsible if not outright ignorant or deliberately deceptive to claim that the sinking of New More Island was primarily a product of Global Warming and a concurrent rise in the sea level.

It shouldn't take a rocket scientists to figure out that if the sinking of New More Island was solely due to global warming induced rising seal levels, we should be able to see the equivalent sinking of coastlines all around the world. That no such corresponding global coastline sinking is occurring all over the world should have given the writer and the editors responsible for that terrible piece of journalism a bit of pause. It didn't.

They left the truth out there to just sink in the mud.

See Also: Bengal Island succumbs to global warming nonsense – AP gets nutty over the loss of a sandbar
Wattsupwiththat critiques another news article on the same subject. They also have pictures and charts on the subject.

See Also:AP Lies: Island Sunk By Global Warming
Sweetness & Light goes after the same AP article as Wattsupwiththat.

Rushing The Sale. A Look At An Environmentalist Propaganda Technique.

With the Cap and Trade bill comming up again, there will be many examples of crude environmentalist propoganda to highlight.

Here is one that claims that Anthropogenic Global Warming will cause the sea-levels to rise and destroy a coastal city.

See:How global warming might transform Vancouver’s shoreline

Rather typical of one of the most dishonest forms of Anthropogenic Global Warming propaganda, the article starts out by suggesting a picture of a well known place transformed (as if in an instant) into a devastated landscape of watery ruin. Many of these propaganda scare stories use this technique to induce an emotional response in the reader.

Granville Island, Kitsilano and Jericho beaches, the Stanley Park seawall, the Downtown Eastside, and the port all help to define Vancouver in the eyes of the world. But try to imagine what this city would look like if all of these local landmarks were underwater.

Ridiculous, you say? Perhaps. But it’s not so far-fetched if all of Greenland’s glaciers were to disappear, causing sea levels to rise—and if Vancouver didn’t take steps to ameliorate the effects.

Of course it is ridicules. It is an extreme picture painted in the most frightening and immediate terms possible in order to rush people into accepting a ready made prescription.

The AGW activist have a solution readymade. You are to transform your life, from everything that you are allowed to do and even everything that you are allowed to think. You are to surrender your body and soul to their benevolent guidance.

If you resist or ask troubling questions, you will be called a “denier,” akin to the insane people that deny the holocaust. With this type of rhetorical slight of hand, they will try to make troublesome AGW doubters into social and political pariahs.

Asking questions will not be allowed in the beautiful future they offer.

"Serve the state" you will be told. "Be happy. Surrender all of your cares and worries to those that can better manage you and the world around you."

And in whispers they will ask - (You aren't a “denier” are you?)

~~~

Climate change is real. The planet's climate is not static. It never has been. It never will be.

AGW is politics. It is a scheme to frighten enough people with something as natural as the rising and the setting of the sun to force the whole world's population to surrender to statist totalitarianism.

It's a Brave New World that the AGW activist are going to bring about. Their paradise of universal totalitarian chattel slavery will do nothing to freeze the climate. The climate can't be made static. Only the mad and the evil would try to shape people's lives on the AGW premise that the climate can or even should be made static. Unfortunately, there are mad and evil people in the world.

Social Security In The Red

In the wake of the passage of the Democrat's Health Care Rationing Scheme, News comes out that our nations Social Security system has reached a point were it will be paying out more then it takes in.

See: Social Security Payouts to Exceed Revenue This Year

The problem, he said, is that payments have risen more than expected during the downturn, because jobs disappeared and people applied for benefits sooner than they had planned. At the same time, the program’s revenue has fallen sharply, because there are fewer paychecks to tax.

Analysts have long tried to predict the year when Social Security would pay out more than it took in because they view it as a tipping point — the first step of a long, slow march to insolvency, unless Congress strengthens the program’s finances.

" . . . unless Congress strengthens the program’s finances?"

How, pray tell, can "Congress strengthen the program’s finances" without raising taxes, cutting benefits, or some combination of both?

When the Democrat's health-care rationing scheme runs into problems, won't they have to raise taxes, cut benefits, or some combination of both?

Why would we want a government that can't manage a simple retirement plan to be put in-charge of rationing our health-care?

If the Democrats break Social Security, people will just be broke. If the Democrats break their health-care rationing scheme, people will die.

Did Democrats Lie About Racist Slurs?

There were reports during the vote for the Democrat's health-care rationing scheme that Tea Party protesters had hurled racial slurs at members of the Black Caucus.

See: Tea party protesters use racial epithet against Georgia's John Lewis

Demonstrators outside the U.S. Capitol , angry over the proposed health care bill, shouted "nigger" Saturday at U.S. Rep. John Lewis , a Georgia congressman and civil rights icon who was nearly beaten to death during an Alabama march in the 1960s.

When I heard the first reports of the slurs, I was afraid they were true, but struck by the fact that there was no sound or video being played in the media.

If it really happened, we should have heard and seen the evidence of it played over and over again a-la Rodney King.

There were video cameras everywhere.

No sound or video has surfaced that supports the claim that racial slurs were directed at the Black Caucus members. None.

None at all.

Was it all a lie?

See: MEDIA FRAUD– More Proof That the Leftist Media Lied About Racist Attacks On Black Reps While They Ignored Vulgar Attacks By Lib Politicians

See: Third Video of Tea Party Protest of Black Congressmen Reveals No Racial Taunts

Your friends and family on the left may bring this up in the coming days. Challenge them for proof. They don't have any. Then ask them "Was it all a lie?"

HT Amy Ridenour and Pi Guy @ CC

The Myth Of The Pro-Life Democrat

Bart Stupak sucker-punched the pro-life movement.

In the end, the power that the Democrats would gain by giving themselves the ability to ration health care was more important to Congressman Stupak than was the pro-life stance that he had claimed to hold.

You can hear Stupak try to explain as Megyn Kelly rips him a new one.



He had 4 votes. Enough to kill the bill.

Stupak sold out. (and cheaply at that.)

See also: Schlafly: Health Care Vote Set to Expose the Myth of the 'Pro-Life Democrat'

"Any formerly pro-life Democrat who casts a 'Yes' vote for this Senate health care bill tonight will be forever remembered as being among the deciding votes which facilitated the largest expansion of abortion services since Roe v. Wade."

"Mr. Stupak and his Democrat followers have now clarified that you cannot be pro-life and be a Democrat. If abortion was truly their biggest issue, they wouldn't willfully align themselves with the Party of Death."

I think that Phylis Schafly makes a strong argument. When tested, Stupak valued life less then he valued the Democrat Party's accrual of political power.

Fighting Back

Two things to do without delay.

1. Send a Republican a campaign contribution. It does not have to be a large amount. It just has to be something.

I will be sending some money to SarahPAC tonight.

2. Send a Thank You email to everyone that voted against that abomination tonight, even the Democrats that voted against it.

These people need our thanks. They fought the valiant fight.

The Count

FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 165

H R 3590 RECORDED VOTE 21-Mar-2010 10:49 PM
QUESTION: On Motion to Concur in Senate Amendments
BILL TITLE: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Democratic
Ayes 219, Noes 34

Republican
Ayes 0, Noes 178

TOTALS
Ayes 219, Noes 212

For the full list of names, See: FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 165

Republicans Score A Huge Victory For The Constitution

In the battle over the Democrat's Health Care Rationing scheme, the Republicans have won a huge victory against the Democrat's consideration of using a shady and frankly unconstitutional gimmick to pass the bill in the house without a direct vote, with a slight-of-hand trick called the Slaughter Solution.

The Slaughter Solution is now dead.

See:House Opts Against 'Deeming' Health Care Bill Passed

House Democrats on Saturday decided against using a controversial tactic to pass the Senate's version of the health care bill,  a senior House source confirmed to Fox News.

The decision capped an ongoing discussion on whether to use a so-called "deem and pass" strategy that would allow House members to approve the Senate version of health care bill without an actual vote before casting votes on a second "fix-it" resolution, known as reconciliation.

This is a big win for Republicans.

Now the Democrats will have to put their names on the Yea's and Nay's of their plans to ration health-care. Now we can hold them accountable for this monstrosity without them being able to pretend that they did not vote for the damnable thing.

See also: Rules Committee meeting descends into chaos

HT: JCM, PiGuy & CC

The Democrat Health-Care Rationing Scheme Legislation As A Vote Winner

Can the Democrats really believe that their Health-Care Rationing Scheme will be good for them in the Midterms and beyond?

In a word, Yes.

See: EXCLUSIVE: Biden Says White House Getting Earful from Nervous Lawmakers Over Health Care

Biden said once these provisions take effect and the American people feel the impact, lawmakers who vote "yes" will reap the benefits.

"They're going to see right off the bat the horrible [things] aren't real and there are some very good things that become apparent immediately," Biden said. "Once the American public realizes that ... [legislators are] going to be rewarded."

Can the Democrats really believe that?

Yes they can.

We are talking about true-believers.

Many on the left believe that the rightly guided (god) state can make for a paradise on earth. To us, that is a madness, but to them it is in the realm of the possible.

In fact, our oppositions to their efforts to bring about thier new and inherently benevolent god-state is seen by them as proof our meanness and selfishness.

Sure, they understand that some of the things that they will do will make some people unhappy for a time, but they believe that the paradise of the god-state that they are ushering in is worth a few minor discomforts that some may experience. They believe that once the god-state is in place, that everyone that was discomforted will realize that it was selfish of them to complain of their discomforts and come to support with the whole of their heart and soul the greatness and the glory of the benevolent new god-state.

Can they really believe that the ends justify the means?

I think that they really do believe that they are doing a right and good thing. They believe that they are doing a good thing worth every effort and with an end so worthy that any means to bring it about can be justified.

We have seen the Democrats seriously entertain the Slaughter Solution. I think that made it clear that they really are based in a "the ends justify the means" world-view.

They are only held back by the limits of what they can get away with.

.

We are about to embark on a brave new future.

FIghting The Democrat's Health-Care Rationing Scheme The Idaho Way

Idaho points the way.

See: Idaho challenges national health care proposal; more states may follow

Washington (CNN) -- Idaho on Wednesday became the first state to pass a law saying no thanks to part of President Obama's health care proposal.

The Idaho Health Care Freedom Act says in part, "every person within the state of Idaho is and shall be free to choose or decline to choose any mode of securing health care services without penalty or threat of penalty."

Gov. C.L. "Butch" Otter, a Republican, said Wednesday he signed it because he believes any health care laws should ensure people are "treated as an individual, rather than as an amorphous mass whose only purpose in this world is to obey federal mandates."

The Democrats are not just a federal party. They operate on the State and local levels as well. They should all be made to feel the heat from the Federal Democrat's attempt to ration Health-Care.

The Democrats at the State level need to feel threatened by the blow-back from what their partners are doing at the federal level.

One way to do this is to contact your State government Representatives and ask them to pass a bill like Idaho's.

No Democrat should feel safe, no mater how low or obscure the office they hold. All Democrats need to know that they will be held accountable for the Federal level Democrat's attempt to screw the citizens of the United States.

Call your local state representatives and ask them (politely) to follow Idaho's lead.

There is no time to hesitate or wait. Call them today.

Just How Stupid Is Democrat Congressman Patrick Murphy?

It may be that he just thinks the voters in his district are stupid enough to accept his weird rationalization for voting for the Obamacare abomination.

See: Murphy supports health overhaul

The 8th District congressman said the measure, if passed, will result in the "largest middle-class health care tax break in our country's history."

Calling it the "largest middle-class health care tax break in our country's history," Congressman Patrick Murphy said Tuesday he will support health care legislation, and the process by which it becomes law doesn't concern him.

What planet does Congressman Patrick Murphy(D) live on?

[Additional - added at 11:45am]

Democrat Congressman Patrick Murphy has a press release on his website that offers his rationalization for voting for the Obamacare abominations.

See: Patrick Murphy Announces Support for Long Overdue Health Insurance Reform

Health insurance reform is deficit-reducing, a condition that Congressman Murphy, as a member of the Blue Dog Coalition, stressed was critical to his support for any health insurance reform measures. In fact, according to the independent Congressional Budget Office, all of the current legislative proposals reduce the deficit. Pharmaceutical companies, hospitals, and other industry groups, who will see millions of new customers under this legislation, are contributing hundreds of billions of dollars to pay for insurance reform.

How can effectively nationalizing what amounts to about one sixth of the US economy reduce the deficit? Is it possible that he really believes what he is saying?

Rationing Health-Care By A Procedural Slight Of Hand.

By hook or by crook, the left-wing extremist that run the Democrat Party are going to get their "Health-Care" bill onto the President's desk one way or the other. The Slaughter Trick is beyond the pale. They will set them selves up to ration your healthcare if they have to rape the Constitution to do it.

See: House may try to pass Senate health-care bill without voting on it

Instead, Pelosi (D-Calif.) would rely on a procedural sleight of hand: The House would vote on a more popular package of fixes to the Senate bill; under the House rule for that vote, passage would signify that lawmakers "deem" the health-care bill to be passed.

The tactic -- known as a "self-executing rule" or a "deem and pass" -- has been commonly used, although never to pass legislation as momentous as the $875 billion health-care bill. It is one of three options that Pelosi said she is considering for a late-week House vote, but she added that she prefers it because it would politically protect lawmakers who are reluctant to publicly support the measure.

We are down to the wire. Now is the time for you to do something.

Here are two toll-free phone numbers to the Capital Switchboard.

Try these ones first
877 762 8762, 866-877-4455 (Should work for both the House and Senate.)

800 965 4701 (House)
800 828 0498 (Senate)

As always, be civil and polite.

When you call these numbers, you will reach an operator. Ask the operator to transfer you to your congressman's or Senator's office. You will need to know your critter's name. Don't rely on the operator to know who your congress critter is. If you don't know, try this website. Enter your zip-code and your State. It will give you your congress critter's name and contact information.

This is important.

It is a game changing.

This is a watershed moment in our nation's history.


~

And here is one that needs to hear from all of us.

Nancy Pelosi - Phone (202) 225-4965, Fax (202) 225-8259