We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Why is it, he wondered, that certain intellectuals are “merciless toward the failings of the democracies but ready to tolerate the worst crimes as long as they are committed in the name of the proper doctrines”?
Mr Edsall notes that "demographic trends suggest the continued growth of pro- Democratic constituencies and the continued decline of core Republican voters, particularly married white Christians."
I am highlighting a weekend link about Fred Siegel that might have gone overlooked in the shuffle: 'The New Tammany Hall' - The historian of the American city on what Wall Street and the 'Occupy' movement have in common, and how government unions came to dominate state and local politics. One quote:
The future of his city worries Mr. Siegel. Forty years ago, New York had the most manufacturing jobs in America. But as the finance sector's share of the national economy grew to 23% in 2007 from 7% in 1980, New York turned almost into a one-company town. Meantime, the growing claims on the public purse by those who make little to no contribution to the economy have driven up taxes and the costs of doing business. The city creates jobs in tourism, hotels and restaurants at the lower end of the scale. "What we don't create are private-sector middle-class jobs," says Mr. Siegel. "We have a ladder with the middle rungs missing."
Government workers make up a growing share of the middle class. And perversely, says Mr. Siegel, unions can justifiably claim to defend the interests of the middle-class worker. "That's because the costs that they've imposed have driven out the private-sector middle class. They are the disease of which they proclaim themselves the cure."
Our national fascination with holiday shopping is once again at 'all in' mode. Black Friday has passed, Cyber Monday is upon us. Cyber Monday was originally a fictional concept, with online retailers suggesting for years that the Monday after Black Friday was the heaviest online shopping day of the year. It wasn't. When it was first suggested, it was twelfth largest holiday shopping day. However, Cyber Monday is now a cultural meme and last year became the largest online shopping day for Amazon simply because that's how it was marketed.
Regardless of which day is largest online, Black Friday remains the shopping holiday that resonates. Every year, we hear it used as a bellwether on the health of our animal spirits toward spending. This year, we've heard that it's indicative of great things to come! Then again, it was used that way last year, too. 2011 has proven to be substantially larger than 2010, in terms of Black Friday spending (6.6% growth versus 0.3% growth year over year). Ultimately, Black Friday of 2010 indicated nothing of importance economically, because most of the holiday spending increases were from high income folk. The large initial growth on Black Friday this year may not say much more than people are looking for bargains, and retailers are seeking to burn off inventory.
We can but repeat that this is a scare that has run its course. The ersatz scientists will never again hold the global community in its thrall to the same extent, on this subject.
Here at Maggie's, we don't understand why people do not pray for some global warming. The Medieval Warming, and the Roman-era warming - both now reversed by historic cooling - were excellent for civilization. Mostly, we worry about the effects of the next Ice Age on our property values. A mile-deep glacier on top of my house would have a negative effect, and another Ice Age is a certainty.
Politicians love it, because they can pay for votes today, and the next generation can worry about it after they have retired. I can buy a boat today, and hope I keep my job so I can pay it off over the next five years. Or I could buy a tiny 1 BR condo in NY, and pay if off over 15 years while taking an interest deduction from my crippling federal, state, and city income taxes. Businesses need it, in fact, require it, for investment purposes, in the hopes that they can grow. Banks love it, because they can lend the money and profit from the interest. Students love it: they can go to school now, and hope to pay off their loans in the future. Christmas shoppers love it, of course, because Santa is credit.
In the end, using credit makes people, and governments, debt slaves, slaves to bond markets and slaves to banks who offered the loans. This is annoying to debtors, who have already enjoyed spending the money and are peeved, if not in trouble, because they owe it. The bond market now controls the global economy, not because "it" wants to, but because of governments and people willingly, freely, democratically, taking on debt to pay the bills instead of taxing the heck out of the people who work. Borrowing is all voluntary, the loans are from one's neighbors, - and it is a big house of cards.
I was raised by parents who refused to ever go into debt. They viewed it as a temptation for the weak. They never even had a credit card. They saved for 15 years to buy a modest house, and never viewed it as an investment. They made it home, and live there now while the trees they had planted become enormous, dwarfing their home. They have hardly ever gone anywhere, or had much fun or adventure as I think of it, but they love their church and their little town where everybody knows them. A simple life. In my adult life, I have learned to take out loans for no reason, and to pay them back after a few months, just to have a good credit rating. A good credit rating, today, is like a grade in reality living. Someday, I might want to use some credit, but today I do not. I use credit cards as if cash, to keep my rating perfect.
I might need a loan, someday.
Easy money is dangerous. Living within your means, whether as a family or as a government, is just no darn fun. There's always a good excuse or rationale for taking on more debt. I fear that the world will soon see the economic consequences of excessive debt in which everybody has borrowed from his neighbor, and his neighbor from him. A bank, after all, contains nothing but one's neighbor's money, leveraged.
"I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today":
I’ve been hiring twenty-somethings for about twenty years now, and though they are getting more tech-savvy, their productivity keeps plummeting. I believe this is due to their snowballing sense of entitlement.
'The New Tammany Hall' - The historian of the American city on what Wall Street and the 'Occupy' movement have in common, and how government unions came to dominate state and local politics:
One can appreciate why the "we are the 99%" militants might resist Mr. Siegel's logic. He links the liberalism of the 1960s, not any excess of the free market, to today's crisis. The Great Society put the state on growth hormones. Less widely appreciated, the era gave birth to a powerful new political force, the public-sector union. For the first time in American history there was an interest dedicated wholly to lobbying for a larger government and the taxes and debt to pay for it.
Must be human nature to desire some sort of supernatural political salvation, but that is far from an American notion: it's the fantasy of a having a perfect Master or a child's fantasy of a perfect parent.
That's interesting, because I recently read a piece about tax policy which referred to taxpayers as "tax units." I guess that's how bureaucrats think. Are you an income unit, an expense unit, or neither?
Gee whiz, the banks won't lend them any more money to maintain a fake, debt-based life style. Why would they, if they know it cannot be repaid?
Some of these countries have been, in effect, ripping off gullible lenders just as much as people taking mortgages or student loans who know they can never really pay them unless they get very lucky. It's close to theft, or fraud, or something.
One is tempted to conclude, at this point, that the political theory of the EU today is being written by financiers and financial analysts in their credit reports. They are anxious, after all, only secondarily about markets. They are primarily anxious about governance and structures of governance — because the markets are trying to figure out whether the institutions of the EU and its members are serious about their legal and political commitments, and in what ways and to what
Who cares whether it's hacked? It's government-paid science, isn't it? We paid for this crap. What their emails show is that these guys argue amongst themselves about how to twist and spin to present the data they want people to get. It is disgusting, a major scandal. Somewhat happily, some amongst the cabal actually want to be honest.
I have known science majors and scientists, and they never talked like this about things they were curious about. This is money politics, not science. Sounds more like a Wall Street bond sales meeting than science, to me. "How to we unload this crap to the suckers without totally and permanently compromising our reputations?"
Revkin wants to focus on the hacking, not the content. Well, Watergate was basically a pre-internet hacking, was it not? And Teapot Dome? Our thanks to the mystery hacker who cares more about the truth than these scientists do. I think there will be a third email dump in the future.
There's nothing quite like being chewed out by the boss to act as a motivational factor. For those of you who saw my morning post, I pretty-much kissed off any further debate posts because of the lack of responses the recent posts have been getting. Worse, of the five comments left in my last debate wrap-up, all five were deprecating and derogatory of the candidates, that same ol' whiny "Can't we have somebody ELSE?" attitude I see in the comments over at Hot Air and PJ Media. As I said to Bird Dog in email, I can abide 0 comments, but I can't abide -5.
Anyways, after a couple of verbal lashings from the boss and some emails drifting in from (now-former) friends calling me 'Dr. Bitchy' and 'jma' (a real long-time Farmer) piping up in the comments to another post, I figure I'm cursed with the job. Blogging isn't an easy life, let me tell you.
Maybe it's just a simple matter of imposing a new comments rule:
Happy thoughts only.
As far as the CNN debate goes, I don't have the time to write a full wrap-up, but I do think one interesting aspect of it should be mentioned.
In the previous two debates, not a barb or bomb was hurled. As I noted at the time, the candidates were all in complete agreement that Social Security needed a major overhaul and abortion-on-demand wasn't the way to go, and they only differed on exactly how they'd approach the problem.
But when it comes to things like national security, with such gems as a nuclear-armed, Islamic-driven nation like Pakistan on the table, the rules change. The question now isn't 'how to fix the problem', but where does the problem exist?
Do we threaten to cut off aid to them? Do we offer them even more money? Do we handle them with kid gloves? Do we talk tough to them, threatening them with sanctions? Do we seek their permission for every drone we lob at some bad guy or do we just tell them hey, if you aren't going to handle it, then we will, and lob away to our heart's content? Is there a 'problem' with Pakistan at all, and, if so, is it with the government or the fundamentalists?
So, while no bombs were hurled, there was a lot of electrically-charged "I highly disagree with..." going on as each chose to stake out their claim. I'm not sure two candidates agreed completely with one another the entire evening, in vast contrast to the amity they've shared in the last two debates. It wasn't quite cantankerous, but heading that direction quickly.
I'd also note that we had a debate on national security just a few weeks ago and there was nowhere near the distance between the candidates as was displayed last night. Credit the good folk at CNN and famed game show host Wolf "Blitz" Blitzer for coming up with just the right questions to create the most division and animosity between them. As they say, professionalism always shows.
The 'mood' in the US, if we are to believe the MSM, is that nasty Republicans have undermined the political process with their adherence to outdated dogma. Nevermind that Democrats adhere to outlandish (and outdated) dogma, the discussion will revolve around how to demonize one side or the other. The MSM claim "compromise" is what's important. They also hint the Republicans cause all the problems.
There is a history of compromise in Congress, but there is also a history of sticking to your guns. How you view things usually depends on what you want to believe. Personally, I think sometimes compromise is good, but at other times sticking to your beliefs is better. In the case of the deficit, I'm more dogmatic. There have to be more spending cuts before we can even discuss, let alone implement, more taxes. If we do implement more taxes, I believe having the 'rich' pay more isn't a bad idea, but a better idea is to combine that with a broader income tax base that includes the 49% who don't pay anything.
The nature of the spending cuts are as fair as we could hope for, given the current political environment. Particularly if you believe, as I do, that the Supercommittee idea is an unconstitutional solution. I believe this because cuts are 'automatic' whether the committee agrees to a deal or there is no agreement at all. If they make a deal, Congress agrees to support it. If they fail, the current outcome, nobody votes for anything except to possibly stop the cuts. There is limited representation, there is limited discussion. The cuts just happen. Clearly there is an undemocratic theme here, but at least everything gets cut. Nothing is spared. It may be unconstitutional, but we're being unconstitutional together to achieve a goal. I can't believe that's good, but some think it is.
Mike, The Figure you sent is very deceptive[...] there have been a number of dishonest presentations of model results by individual authors and by IPCC [...]
Follow the money...same goes for us: the ICTSMECE (Internation Cartel To Support More Evil Carbon Emissions) gives Maggie's Farm $2 million/year for our skepticism about settled science. Cash, directly to our secret Cayman Island account. It comes in handy during cash flow jams.
We have two generations that have been raised to believe that, ultimately, someone else is responsible for the essentials of their lives. They believe they are supposed to retire in their fifties or early sixties, with a pension followed by Social Security. They believe they are supposed to relinquish concern for healthcare costs when they turn 65. They believe that if things get bad enough in their lives, unemployment, and later welfare, will keep a roof over their head and food on the table. They’ve been trained to believe this by a ruling class that has been assuring them since the 1930s that they have the fundamental right to a soft life.
These people do not want to think about a world where these things are not true.
This is how it begins: Doctors urged to limit practices. Next come the "guidleines," then come the one-size-fits-all requirements. At that point, the patient becomes helpless and choice-less, and the physician becomes an agent of the state rather than a confidential and private partner with his patient.
At that point, I will reluctantly quit and abandon you suffering patients - and myself when illness comes my way - to whatever unionized government lackeys, technicians, and drones they can find who are willing to pretend to take care of you, between their mandated lunch, coffee breaks, and 1 hour/day study time to master the government treatment manuals which will tell them what they can do for your age and category.
I have seen that kind of medicine, and will not be part of it. Watch for the politicization of medical care. Ugly. Every real and imaginary disease, and every real or imaginary treatment, will have a lobby in DC.
Government contaminates and corrupts almost everything it touches. Why any Psychiatrist or psychotherapist could be anything but Libertarian-minded is beyond my comprehension, because we are all about freedom, individuation, self-determination, and self-reliance.
No time to check the hearts of girls' dollies. A damn shame.
The riots by anti-Vietnam war protestors at the Democrat Convention in Chicago in 1968 received mostly favorable coverage from the major media at the time, as it bemoaned the police actions. Contrary to their expectations, public opinion was negative toward the protestors and Democrats seen as weak on public order, which helped elect Richard Nixon.
Democrat and Republican presidential campaign sages likely studied this and are planning for similar events in 2012.
Then, avoiding the draft motivated most college-age protestors to join in with radicals whose program was supporting North Vietnam. Now, the financial and career repercussions of loan debt and fading job prospects sends students to the barricades to demand continued societal financial support for avoiding their fate, and liberals are supporting this to defeat Republicans who want to face up to our debilitating deficits and stagnant economy.
That is the sharp difference between then and now. The anti-Vietnam war protestors, although having much support among leading Democrats, were largely independent of the Democrat Party and its organizations. Their primary target was to elect anti-Vietnam war Democrats and to confront Democrat presidential nominee Vice-President Hubert Humphrey for his public fealty to President Johnson’s war policies. Today, there is major financial and manpower support for the OWSers from a key and critical Democrat base, the liberal labor unions, and there are major Democrat leaders, right up to President Obama, publicly for the OWSers.
Now as then, protestors provoke police actions to clear their blocking of public spaces, not to mention police the violence and rapes occurring within their encampments or clean up their fetid messes. Now as then the liberal media neglect to report mush of the excesses by protestors and castigate the police, and by extension those who believe in public order.
A prediction. Although some OWSers will interrupt Democrats, (President Obama today replied to the OWSers, “You are the reason I ran for office.”) the Democrat powers behind the OWSers will try to gather them at the Republican presidential nominating convention in 2012 in Tampa, Florida, for a repeat of Chicago 1968. The question. Will the OWSers end up helping the Republican nominee’s election in 2012 as in 1968?
Snark question: Will they bus in "homeless" people?
"But, gee whiz, we sure have had a lot of weather lately, haven't we? Storms and droughts? Terrible."
The climate alarmists are corrupt and contemptible, but we try to be sympathetic to their scam. They need government grants to pay their mortgages, and we also understand why governments like this stuff - it means more tax income for them. Governments will take tax income anywhere and everywhere. They don't care where it comes from so they will get on board with any "crisis," real or imaginary. (With the MSM in the tank with them: See the NYT's "near-poverty crisis." We are all near poverty, for heaven's sake, unless we work. That's life unless you are on the dole or, on the other end of the bell curve, hit the jackpot and live in Hollywood.)
How many "crises" have governments used to rip us hard-working souls off in the past 30 years? It's always something, if only to justify their existence. Always a crisis to be addressed, and only government experts can deal with it. Who believes that baloney anymore? You can only cry wolf so many times until people learn the game. And you can model anyway you want. That's the beauty of models: you'll be retired when the long-term results come in. Too bad Corzine didn't have time for his models. Neither did Long Term Capital.
I think I'll fly to Paris in my plastic glued-up model of a P-15 I made in 5th grade.
Rahm Emanuel said it best: "Let no crisis go to waste." Meaning, government should grab power at every opportunity. These incompetent, sleazy, professional politicians know best. That's the Chicago Way, the old Big City machine way. It helps them maintain their meal ticket while others work to pay them for attending meetings, lunches, and lobster dinners while picking up chicks. Models, whenever possible, of course.
Of course, most of us at Maggie's would welcome a global warming trend. It would be a blessing to the darn human species, and would lower our heating bills in the Northeastern US.
Today, the first of two GDP revisions was issued. It was revised down from 2.5% to 2.0%. Revisions are a natural part of our economic reporting structure. We can't get all the data in a timely fashion, so certain guesses are made regarding the data that is missing when initial results go out. 'Guesses' should be incorrect. 'Estimates' would be the correct term.
It's not unusual for data to be revised downward, and it's not unusual for revisions to get little fanfare. What is unusual is the consistent nature of the downward revisions we have seen over the last few years and how little attention this receives.
I'm sure the bureaucrats view their 'guesses' as 'estimates'. But I wouldn't be surprised if they have been told to paint a pretty picture, within reason. Few of the downward revisions have been outlandish. Given the nature of the economy the past few years, however, wouldn't it make sense to have a slightly more negative outlook on the initial print?
No, because the initial print is what gets all the press and it's what everyone will pay attention to. Politics isn't supposed to alter the economic reporting, but in this administration it has taken a decidedly political turn.
JFK was assassinated by an ardent Leftist and Castro-lover, and RFK by a Jordanian who hated his support of the nation of Israel. Might as well get the facts right.
...the failure of the Supercommittee should be no surprise. The Democrats have only one election strategy and that’s to blame the Republicans. They have nothing to gain from cooperation and everything to gain from conflict. They would see the economy burn, even if they didn’t have anything to gain from the flames—but they do.
Hypocrisy abounds on the Republican side where symbolic votes cover a multitude of economic sins. And when he symbolic votes tank, then the masks come off. But why expect anything different? The United States is not a one party system and congress can only be held hostage so far. The Republican Party is not innocent, only comparatively less guilty, their crimes those of greedy and complacency, rather than the ideological agenda that fattens up the spending of the left.
Everyone talks cuts, but no one makes them because cuts are a dangerous thing. Elections are expensive and someone has to pay for them. Indirectly that someone is the poor schmoe sending off money to D.C. without getting anything for it but aching fingers.
Just as housework withers away, so the obligations of parents to their children wither away gradually until finally society assumes the full responsibility. Under capitalism children were frequently, too frequently, a heavy and unbearable burden on the proletarian family. Communist society will come to the aid of the parents. In Soviet Russia the Commissariats of Public Education and of Social Welfare are already doing much to assist the family. We already have homes for very small babies, creches, kindergartens, children’s colonies and homes, hospitals and health resorts for sick children. restaurants, free lunches at school and free distribution of text books, warm clothing and shoes to schoolchildren. All this goes to show that the responsibility for the child is passing from the family to the collective.
Supporters of Obama's foreign policy are sure to be scratching their heads now. Anyone who feels Obama has done a better job than his predecessor, particularly with regard to the Mid East and Islam in general due to the OBL mission, have new questions to ask themselves. Such as, "What the heck was Leon Panetta paying attention to?"
General David Petraeus took over just 2 months ago, and faces his first crisis as a massive network of operatives have, no doubt, been executed or face execution. All the goodwill Obama may have had for catching and killing Bin Laden should now be tossed right out the window. Early reports on what occurred may prove incorrect, but it appears the operatives and their handlers "got lazy" regarding their communications. In that business, laziness carries a high price.
Yesterday, The Barrister posted a terrific video in which the manipulation of Europe was exposed in a speech at the European Parliament. The thought that a 'conspiracy' may be taking place seems far-fetched, but the fingerprints are showing up everywhere.
The Euro is probably doomed. It was a lousy idea from the start, but once it was implemented, it was managed poorly. The EuroZone is a mess, democracy there is a thing of the past. It's amazing how the mismanagement of money can alter politics, but we are seeing the same theatre take place here in the US, although it's happening in slow motion. For all intents and purposes, the dollar remains "the best looking horse in the glue factory."
As it stands, the central bankers are the power brokers now. Bernanke will choose the next president, just as the ECB drove two Prime Ministers from office.
Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws. ~Mayer Amschel Rothschild
University of California President Mark Yudoff on Sunday issued a press release that “ I am appalled by images of University of California students being doused with pepper spray and jabbed with police batons on our campuses.” President Yudoff went on:
I intend to convene all 10 chancellors, either in person or by telephone, to engage in a full and unfettered discussion about how to ensure proportional law enforcement response to non-violent protest.
To that end, I will be asking the chancellors to forward to me at once all relevant protocols and policies already in place on their individual campuses, as well as those that apply to the engagement of non-campus police agencies through mutual aid agreements.
Further, I already have taken steps to assemble experts and stakeholders to conduct a thorough, far-reaching and urgent assessment of campus police procedures involving use of force, including post-incident review processes.
This prompt action stands in stark contrast to how President Yudoff handled the outrageous and illegal interruptions of Israel Ambassador Oren’s speech at UC Irvine in February 2010.
Things 
Anchoress is 
Global Warming Bubble is Popping
So soon? Advent begins tomorrow.
Ten Commandments via 
This is how it begins: 
Did you know 