Socialism with an (R)

Posted on August 25, 2025 by Joe Benning

Republicans have a very slim majority in Congress. They are trying to maintain said majority by, among other things, gerrymandering. That effort may be successful in the short run by allowing them to pick up a few more Republican leaning districts. Hence the Democratic squawking. 

But the time honored practice of gerrymandering isn’t really all that important. What is important though, is that nationally, the Republican party has effectively adopted socialism as its raison d’être.  How else to explain comrade Trump’s decision to take a 10% equity stake in the Intel corporation?

Or, for that matter, how to explain his taking a 15% cut of Nvidia’s sales to China of certain computer chips. Not to mention the same deal with Advanced Micro Devices. Or Kevin Hassett (former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors and one of the front runners to be Fed chief) proclaiming that the White House is likely to continue seeking similar deals with other companies. How else do we understand why Trump, referencing the Intel deal, today said on his social media feed that  “I will make deals like that for our Country all day long.” 

All actions taken (of course) without Congressional authorization.  And not to put too fine a point on it, the Trump administration allowed Nippon Steel to buy US Steel only after Nippon acceded to certain political demands. 

While Republicans are tripping over themselves preparing to run a national campaign against the self-declared Democratic Socialist running for mayor of New York, they ought to glance at a mirror.

The Republicans claim to be different. For example they point to Candidate Zohran Kwame Mamdani’s promised rent freezes, fare-free buses (why not subways too?), public grocery stores, universal child care, and a $30 minimum wage, financed (at least in part) by taxing the “wealthy”.  The term wealthy is, of course, routinely left undefined. 

Before the Republicans get too carried away with themselves while busily scorching Mamdani they ought to ask themselves this question: How are they any different? They like to either deny or push off costs too. 

Remember that border wall that Mexico was going to pay for. How did that work out? Or take Trump’s trial balloon about controlling drug prices. How is that different from rent freezes? Or the trial balloon about variable rates for patent fees. Leaving aside the fact that Section 8 of the US Constitution clearly requires Congressional authorization for this, notwithstanding Trumpian bombast, it would effectively be a flat out tax on innovation and next to impossible to administer. 

Then there are the ever changing tariffs that fluctuate with Presidential whims. Interestingly enough, Trump argues simultaneously that (1) tariffs won’t slow global trade, even though it is perfectly obvious to any freshman Econ student that the opposite is true; (2) the revenue derived from the tariffs will substantially reduce the budget deficit  (it won’t) and (3) the tariffs will generate foreign investment and therefore reduce the trade deficit. 

That last argument is particularly amusing in that trade deficits and foreign source  investments are two sides of the same coin. Consequently, any increase in foreign investment necessarily increases the trade deficit. Trump, who insists on referring to country specific trade deficits despite modern supply chains, clearly doesn’t understand this. 

Speaking of the devil, Trump has also decided to impose tariff duties on countries where America has a trade surplus. The US, for instance, has a trade surplus with Brazil, but at last count His Majesty threatened to impose a whopping 50% tariff on all Brazilian goods. His rationale was that  ex Brazilian President Bolsonaro was being treated unjustly, which even if true, has absolutely nothing at all to do with Brazil’s trading position. 

Anyway with respect to his threat to impose a 50% tariff on all Brazilian goods, here is what Trump wrote on his badly misnamed Truth Social: “[Bolsonaro’s arrest] is nothing more, or less, than an attack on a Political Opponent — Something I know much about! It happened to me, times 10…”. 

So, as it turns out, Trump now claims to be offended by the way the Brazilian establishment has behaved with respect to a political opponent.  Let’s see. That’s the same Donald J Trump who cancelled secret service protection for John Bolton (former Trump National Security Advisor), Mike Pompeo (former CIA Director and Secretary of State), Brian Hook (former top aid) Dr. Anthony Fauci (former NIAD Director), Retired General Mark Milley (former Chair of the Joint Chiefs), and former DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. 

He also revoked the security clearances of lawyers critical of him, including New York Attorney General Letitia James, Manhattan prosecutor Alvin Bragg and private lawyer Andrew Weissmann. Arguably Letitia James and Alvin Bragg used their official positions to unjustifiably attack Trump. But that doesn’t justify Trump doing the same thing.

And we know he didn’t sleep with Stormy Daniels. After all, he said he didn’t. And we all know he wouldn’t lie. Nor would he weaponize the justice system the way it was weaponized against him. Otherwise he would pardon all the January 6 rioters without examining their cases. Oops—he did just that. 

So the question of the day is: how exactly, are we to distinguish today’s Republicans from today’s progressives? At least Mamdani is right upfront about the stupid things he apparently believes. (And they are without question, undeniably stupid.) 

The Republicans, however, are unwilling to say what they believe. Probably because they don’t believe in anything other than getting re-elected.  

In a pinch, the Republicans act just like the progressives. They have demonstrated they will do whatever it takes to stay in power. Their only substantive difference with progressives is that they have different constituencies to promise all the “free” goodies to.  But there is no real philosophical difference between the two. 

America can pull itself out of this mess. It is a choice. America’s political leadership has to start acting like it. It could start by experimenting with telling the truth. Which is that (1) America’s love affair with deficit spending has to stop and (2) America is critical for preserving a Liberal world order; the alternative is pretty grim, and our allies are critical for the effort. 

The choice is ours to make. 

JFB

Please follow and like us:
fb-share-icon
Tweet
Posted in Politics | Tagged , | Comments Off on Socialism with an (R)

A Day in the Life

Posted on August 12, 2025 by Joe Benning

Where to begin. Perhaps a partial review of what His Majesty Donald J Trump stirred up recently would be a good start.

On Tuesday August 12, 2025, His Majesty President Donald Trump said Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon should either replace his economist or “just focus on being a DJ.” (David Solomon sometimes volunteers his time to serve as a DJ for charitable events.)

Apparently Jan Hatzius, Goldman’s chief economist, warned in a research note on Sunday that American consumers will end up absorbing an increasing share of the cost of the tariffs that Trump decided to impose. Of course they will. Anyone who took (and passed) freshman economics could tell you that.

Getting rid of Hatzius would be shooting the messenger, which is what Trump habitually does when he encounters news he doesn’t want to hear. Which is precisely what he did when he fired Chief Economist Erika McEntarfer of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, when the BLS reported unemployment numbers he didn’t like. And oh yes. The numbers were “rigged” against him.

Then again on August 8 he claimed that Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan was “highly conflicted” and demanded that Lip-Bu Tan be fired. Three days later, after a meeting at the White House, Trump apparently had an change of heart adding that  Lip-Bu Tan’s  “success and rise is an amazing story.”

On Friday, Trump promised (you know what a Trump promise is worth) a “major lawsuit” against the Fed over its building renovations. He took the opportunity to once again bash Fed Chairman Jerome Powell and demand that the Fed cut interest rates. 

Obviously His Majesty is not quite aware that the Fed does not actually determine interest rates; it can only change the overnight rate. Since the Fed started “lowering rates” in September of 2024, pretty much all Treasury rates longer than two years have gone straight up. 

Ten year treasury rates that are used to price mortgages are about ½ point higher in yield. And the dollar has depreciated about 10% against the Euro since Trump took the oath of office, thus making US Treasury securities less attractive to foreign investors. Which also reduces foreigners willingness to fund the US budget deficit.

The great negotiator also has leaned on Nvidia and Advanced Micro Devices so that the US Government gets a 15% cut on their sales, presumably to China. The people in the Mafia who run the protection rackets couldn’t have done it any better. 

And while we are on the related subject of law enforcement, Mr. Trump decided he was going to take over the Metropolitan Police Department, at least temporarily, in order to rid Washington DC of crime. So now Police Commissioner Trump, who as we know is acutely sensitive to due process, will be responsible for bringing down crime in the District.  Now that Federalism has been tossed overboard—in another “emergency”—the question becomes what Mr Trump will do if the criminals decide not to cooperate. 

As far as I know, no one in the White House has actually enunciated a new strategy for dealing with the problem. Maybe he will give DC criminals a good talking to on Truth Social and threaten to fire them. 

To cap off a week of applied ignorance, according to the Wall Street Journal the White House announced on Friday that it would vet 19 Smithsonian Museums in Washington to “Fit Trump’s Historical Vision”. Interesting that Trump now claims to have a vision of history at all. He ought to share it with us if his staff can dream one up in time. 

All of this since just last Friday, August 8. I  shudder to think of what next week will bring.   

JFB

Please follow and like us:
fb-share-icon
Tweet
Posted in Politics | Tagged | Comments Off on A Day in the Life

The Pyrrhic US Tariff Victory

Posted on August 1, 2025 by Joe Benning

President Donald J Trump and his minions are celebrating the great win they achieved in the trade war they set off.  The win is that, by statute, they raised the average tariff rate the US charges for the importation of goods from Europe from something like 3% to 15%. Which is to say that US consumers will pay higher prices for those imports. In other words he is raising taxes. 

In return for raising taxes on US consumers, representatives of the European Union (EU) promised to invest some thing like an additional $750 billion in America. Two things are of note here. First, EU countries were bound to invest more in America anyway, although the exact amount is in doubt. Secondly, additional investment by foreigners will raise the trade deficit, not lower it. 

The trade deficit and foreign investment simply offset each other; they are two sides of the same coin. Say Foreign Country X sells Y products to the US for $1 million dollars. What then does country X do with the money? Essentially, it has 2 choices. It can either take the money and spend it in the US, or it can invest it in the US. Or it can combine the two. But it can’t avoid transacting in dollars. Nor can it avoid the issue by repatriating the funds. It got paid in dollars, it has to use those dollars one way or another.

If it decides to spend the money in the US, there is no trade deficit. But it will have to spend less than it otherwise would have because the higher prices that result  from the tariffs will surely dampen demand. This will be only partially offset by the cut the US government takes (the tax). Economists refer to the difference between what consumers pay in aggregate and the combination of the tax take and country X’s revenues as a dead-weight loss. 

On the other hand, country X could decide to invest the proceeds in the US either by (for instance) building factories (direct fixed-investment);  by investing in US securities (passive investment) or some combination of each. But in either case the trade deficit rises, and the dead weight effect still applies.

In addition, there are other non-trivial considerations.  The US may suffer a reduction in its competitiveness because of a perception that it has reduced its reliability as a supplier. Similarly, the US dollar may be damaged in FX markets, although its status as the world’s reserve currency probably won’t be challenged. At least not yet. But it is worth noting that the dollar has already depreciated about 10% since Trump took office.

We also frequently hear the refrain “Where’s the recession?”  from Trump’s acolytes. But that is not necessarily the right measure to use. The imposition of tariffs on the global trading system will surely reduce growth rates, and may increase the inflation rate by more than just a one-shot. Those effects may not be instantly noticeable, depending on their severity. But the compounding effects over the years of either (or both) reductions in growth and increases in inflation can be very large. 

Finally, the reduction of trade barriers and of tariffs ushered in a world of greatly increased prosperity. In 1990 about 36% of the population of the world (1.9 billion people) lived in extreme poverty with income of about $2.15 per day measured in 2022 dollars. By 2019, that number was reduced to about 650 million people from 1.2 billion or about 8.4% of the world’s population. 

So the Trump trade agenda, even if successfully implemented, will necessarily fail according to its own criteria. If, for instance, foreign investment in the US increases, so will the trade deficit. If trade barriers (like tariffs) are erected and successfully implemented, global trade will slow more than it ordinarily would have and the world, including the United States, will be poorer. While the affluent countries of the West, including Japan, may feel a pinch, the brunt of the effects of slower growth are likely to be felt by countries in the global south. In turn that may produce political instability. 

The geopolitical victors from a growth slowdown could very well be the elites, but not the people, of China, Russia, North Korea, Iran and Venezuela. 

Congratulations Mr. Trump.

JFB

Please follow and like us:
fb-share-icon
Tweet
Posted in Politics | Tagged , | Comments Off on The Pyrrhic US Tariff Victory

Here We Go Again

Posted on June 10, 2025 by Joe Benning

Back a couple of years ago we were treated to the spectacle of CNN (among others) referring to the “mostly peaceful protests”that followed in the wake of George Floyd’s murder at the hands of Derek Chauvin of the Minneapolis police department. It was a spectacle because the news was presented Baghdad Bob style. Viewers could clearly see the city burning as the news people insisted that the protests were “mostly peaceful” despite the obvious violence. 

We are now getting a repeat performance in LA. In the wake of President Trump’s federalizing California’s national guard to quell anti-ICE protests, the violence has resumed. Anyone who doubts this simply has to look at the pictures taken at the scene, some of which are reproduced below.

LA Riots

LA Rioters

There are some things here that should be blindingly obvious: (1) the “protests” have (predictably enough) become riots, (2) the protesters have become a mob that engaged in violence, (3) Trump’s order to federalize the California National Guard is perfectly legal, and (4) the protesters (and their supporters in the press) make no distinction between legal and illegal immigrants, albeit for different reasons. 

Unsurprisingly local California Democratic officials have adopted rhetoric whose aim is to attempt to (1) minimize or deny the protesters willful use of violence and (2) blame the violence on Trump’s decision to call in the National Guard (and now the marines). 

As it happens, I have no use for Donald Trump. I have never voted for him, and think that on his best day he is a national embarrassment. Moreover I think both the Republicans and the Democrats are dead wrong in their respective approaches to immigration policy. Regardless, violence should have no place in the debate.

It is clear to me that we should welcome qualified immigrants, and especially university students, into the US.  But neither party seems to make a distinction between legal and illegal immigration. Nor do either of them appear to be willing to seriously engage in a reform effort by introducing a realistic bill in Congress.

But facts are facts and one simple fact is both true and largely unrecognized or even acknowledged.  It is that lately partisans have accepted the use of violence as a legitimate political tool. Witness not just the rioting going on in LA; look at the fact that a would be assassin lurked outside the home of Supreme Court Justice Bret Kavanaugh. Or that candidate Trump was nearly assassinated. 

Similarly, look at the people who have announced they are “supporters” of Luigi Mangione. This is a man whose chief claim to fame is that he murdered an insurance executive in cold blood in Manhattan. And while we are at it, let’s not forget the January 6 rioters, virtually all of whom were pardoned by Donald Trump. 

Then there are the supporters of Hamas, mostly found on elite college campuses, who celebrated the violence that Hamas visited on innocent Israelis and others. Some of the campus advocates for Hamas participated in campus violence themselves.  Or how about the protesters who parked themselves outside of Anthony Blinken’s home in Virginia, and courageously decided to pour fake blood in front of the vehicles driving his children to pre-school. Those children were 3 and 4 years old. 

Outside Secretary of State Anthony Blinken’s Home

It is not like these incidents are rare. There is a very long list of politicians, judges, executives and others who have faced actual violence or threats designed to intimidate or cancel them. 

What is so amazing about all this is that it is political malpractice, committed no less, by people who consider themselves political professionals. Do they really think that the vast majority of voters really want to see their cities overrun and set on fire by a mob? 

Perhaps these alleged professionals haven’t had time to view last November’s election result. And they haven’t let it sink in that they are performing a great service for advocates of illiberalism.

JFB

Please follow and like us:
fb-share-icon
Tweet
Posted in Culture, Politics | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Here We Go Again

The Problem with Modern Politics

Posted on May 24, 2025 by Joe Benning

There is a problem with politics (as it is practiced) in virtually all the Western democracies, including the United States. The problem is not that Donald J Trump, the US president, is an idiot—although he is. Nor is the problem that his major organized opposition, the Democratic party is delusional—which it is. 

The problem is that the way for politicians to get elected is to tell people what they want to hear. And so we get a lot of feel good rhetoric about vague generalities. Or rhetoric about how awful the other guy is. And probably both. Nowhere are their clear statements of principle that anyone can hang their hat on. For instance, all politicians are opposed to deficit spending—when the other guy is in office. But when my people are in office there are vital needs to be met. 

As a result, politicians get elected without having the slightest idea of what they will actually do once in office other than to follow the party line, whatever it is at the moment. More importantly, they are blissfully unaware of (or don’t care) what consequences are likely to result from their decisions. As long as the policy can be “spun” to sound good.  (Another word for “spin” is lie). But that is a subject for another time.

Anyone who doubts that the parties don’t know or care about the quality of their decisions should put tribal instincts aside and examine the evidence. For instance, after examining the evidence what rational person can actually believe that the imposition of large tariffs will simultaneously increase revenue and decrease imports? Or, how is it possible to increase foreign investment in the United States without simultaneously raising the trade deficit? After all, they are opposite sides of the same coin; one has to balance out the other.  

Or, who could possibly believe that public schools in the major cities are actually educating the nation’s children? Or who really believes that sex is simply a matter of choice, which is to say, a social construct? That people can choose the sex they would like to be, physical characteristics, including DNA, aside?

Take the matter of political parties. For the last 50 years or so, the Republican party stood four square for free trade. That is now officially out the window. With rare exceptions (Mitch McConnell being one) elected Republicans publicly back the trade restrictionism of Donald Trump. 

Or take Civil Rights. Since the 1960s after throwing off the shackles of its “Solid South” the Democratic Party has claimed to be the Civil Rights party. And yet, when it came to a choice between improving the public schools and backing the teachers’ unions, the party backed the unions every time to the detriment of the students. And to anybody who claims the schools are doing their job: Just look at the history of the test scores. 

The point of all this is not an ode to ideological purity. Nor is it that politicians are hypocrites—which by and large, they are. The point is that the political system is giving the public pretty much what it asked for. Which is the illusion of something for nothing. There are no policy trade-offs to consider in this fantasy world, just free stuff.

But the real world has this tendency to (eventually) rear its ugly head. And it appears to be getting ready to do that. Remember when Donald Trump was going to end the Russian war on Ukraine  in 24 hours? How is that working out? Remember how Donald Trump (like every other candidate for President) was going to end the deficit? How does that pair up with a pledge not to touch the major deficit drivers, namely Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid? 

The bond market might have something to say about fiscal policy. Long term rates have been rising ever since the Fed started easing policy in September of 2024. The Treasury 10-year note and 30-year bond now yield 4.51% and 5.03%. Those yields are higher by about three-quarters of a percent and 1 percent respectively.   

And now for the Democrats, the party that voted against NAFTA and every other free trade measure that came down the pike over the last 50 years. Not only are they firmly in denial over the 2024 election; they are now all-of-a-sudden resolutely opposed to Trump’s tariffs. Not to tariffs generally speaking, but Trump’s tariffs. (There is that pesky principles thing again.) Actually Joe Biden, when he was nominally in charge, kept Trump’s tariffs and added some more trade blocks. 

And speaking of Joe Biden, remember when various spokesmen for the party claimed that Old Joe was “sharp as a tack” and ready to run for another 4 years. Until the debate meltdown when Biden’s decline became irrefutable and it became CYA time. And how about the way the Washington Post defended Biden—that is the newspaper that continues to run the banner “Democracy Dies in Darkness” on the front page. The newspaper that ran column after column attacking Robert Hur, the special prosecutor, as a partisan hack.  Perhaps a little throat clearing is in order here. 

And Democrats are really, really upset over DOGE. Why? Despite the claims (some legitimate) about the lack of due process, they want to spend even more money on various government give aways. Due process and the rule of law be damned. There is, for instance, the matter of the student loan give aways that were repeatedly slapped down by the courts, including the Supreme Court. But it didn’t stop the effort. 

So we have met the enemy and the enemy is us. And it is getting pretty late if we want to turn the boat around. 

JFB

Please follow and like us:
fb-share-icon
Tweet
Posted in Culture, Politics | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on The Problem with Modern Politics

The Biggest Lie. Ever.

Posted on December 22, 2024 by Joe Benning

It is by now beyond dispute that Joe Biden’s mental and physical health were in serious decline from the earliest days of his presidency. It was obvious, or should have been, to even the most casual observer. And there were plenty of voices, usually conservative ones, that pointed out early on that something was amiss. 

The commentators who pointed out the obvious were treated to the usual slanders reserved for “the enemy”.  Among other things, they were accused of being in cahoots with cabals of right-wing conspiracy mongers.  

The usual suspects, including The NY Times, the Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC, NPR and virtually the entirety of the Democratic Party—including its highest ranking officials—participated in the slander. And it was slander; the big lie.  Because they knew that Biden was incapacitated and they desperately tried to cover it up, to the point that they supported Biden’s attempt to run for a second term. 

It was only because of Biden’s meltdown during his June 2024 debate that the whole enterprise came crashing down. And even then, party elders arranged for Biden’s Vice President, Kamala Harris, to get the party’s nomination for President. That would be the Kamala Harris who assured us that Biden was just fine. The same Kamala Harris who attacked special prosecutor Robert Hur for what she claimed were his political motivations for his report on his investigation of Biden. Of course, after the transcript was released, Hur was shown to be correct in his assessment. 

Now consider the front page story published by the Wall Street Journal the other day. 

“If the president was having an off day, meetings could be scrapped altogether. On one such occasion, in the spring of 2021, a national security official explained to another aide why a meeting needed to be rescheduled. “He has good days and bad days, and today was a bad day so we’re going to address this tomorrow,” the former aide recalled the official saying.”

So as early as the spring of 2021—the beginning of Biden’s term—he was having “good days and bad days” such that meetings with national security officials had to be postponed. And all the while we were being assured that Biden was as “sharp as a tack” and that 40 year olds “couldn’t keep up with him” etc etc. The mainstream press for its part acted like an obedient  Greek chorus repeating the lie. Right on cue, they went on the attack against anyone who even suggested that Biden’s mental and physical health were problematical. 

There are only 2 possibilities here. The first is that the The NY Times, its sycophants and the people who worked closely with Biden actually bought the bit. They really believed that Biden was just fine. If that’s the case, they—and I mean the whole bunch of them—are just plain useless. 

The second possibility is far more plausible. The mainstream press, the people who are forever complaining about misinformation, the “fact checkers”, top level bureaucrats, high Democratic officials and other assorted hangers on, knew exactly what the score was. They simply decided to cover it up.  

They decided to cover it up to the point that they were willing to nominate and support a senile old man to be Commander-in-Chief. This while the U.S. was involved in 2 wars, each of which had (and still has) the potential to spiral into a nuclear conflagration.  So great was their lust for power, that they were willing to make that wager to save their positions. 

So here is the obvious question: Why would anybody, anywhere ever trust these people again? Why would anybody ever believe a word they say? Why would anybody ever put these people near the levers of power again? 

They shouldn’t be trusted. Full stop. Or put anywhere near the levers of power. Ever again. 

And, oh yes. Biden is still (at least nominally) the Commander-in-Chief until January 20 at noon. It would be nice to know who is actually running the store until then.

JFB

Please follow and like us:
fb-share-icon
Tweet
Posted in Politics | Comments Off on The Biggest Lie. Ever.

Trouble to Come?

Posted on December 19, 2024 by Joe Benning

Yesterday, the Fed announced a 25 basis point reduction in the Federal Funds rate target. In the event,  the S&P 500 sold off about 3%, while market interest rates spiked upward. Two-year Treasury notes ratcheted up about 12 basis points to 4.35%, while 10 year T-notes rose about 8 basis points to 4.5%. 

Let’s put this in perspective by emphasizing bond market behavior. The Fed began its latest easing cycle at the September 18, 2024 Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting. At that meeting,  the FOMC cut the target rate for Fed Funds by ½ percent to 4 ¾ %. Subsequently, at the next 2 meetings, they voted to lower the target rate another ½ %. They did so in two steps for a cumulative reduction of 1% from the September meeting. 

The press, including the financial press who ought to know better, insists on referring to these policy steps as the Fed “lowering interest rates”. However, immediately after the Fed began its easing cycle, two-year Treasury yields began their ascent from about 3.6% to 4.32% where they are today. Similarly, ten-year Treasuries  began their rise from 3.69% to 4.57% where they are today. 

Certainly, some of the prior run-up in bond prices and reduction in yields is attributable to over enthusiastic bond traders looking for more rapid Fed rate reductions. But a rise of anywhere from 72 to 88 basis points in market yields during a time in which the FOMC reduced its Fed Funds target rate by a full 1% is extraordinary.  

Which may portend trouble to come.  

As it now stands gross Federal debt stands at about $35 trillion. Moreover inflation reports have been hotter than expected for the last several months or so. In addition, the labor market has remained fairly strong, although slightly weaker than it was a few quarters ago. 

That said, DOGE or no, entitlements are the driving force behind federal spending. According to the Economic Report of the President, Social Security, Medicare,  Medicaid  and other Health spending is projected to amount to $4.3 trillion in FY 2025. Add in another $965 billion for interest payments on the debt and we get to about $5.3 trillion, or about 73% of the federal budget. Which, by the way, assumes another $1.7 trillion in deficit spending. 

Now assume that the average maturity of the debt is about 4 years. That requires about $8.75 trillion annually to finance maturing debt. Add to that $1.7 trillion in new debt and we have $10.45 trillion in financing every year for the foreseeable future. 

How in the world is the market supposed to handle that when rates have already risen about three-quarters of a percentage point while the Fed is nominally easing policy? 

The upshot of it is that there is a good case to be made that the financial markets are in for a rough time unless Congress drastically changes the structure of our budgetary woes. That means cutting spending, especially with respect to entitlements.

Neither party has shown any inclination to do that. Trump has promised (for whatever that’s worth) to spare Social Security. The Democrats want to spend even more on entitlements and quite a few of them want “Medicare for All” added into the mix.  Certainly a recipe for disaster if ever we needed to be reminded. 

Time to be very cautious. 

JFB

Please follow and like us:
fb-share-icon
Tweet
Posted in Politics | Comments Off on Trouble to Come?

Violence in America etc

Posted on December 10, 2024 by Joe Benning

Back from Australia where we have been on tour with Road Scholar since November 4, 2024. And a lot has happened since then. A real lot.

Some examples: 

Donald Trump was unambiguously elected president on November 5. In addition to winning the electoral college, Trump won the popular vote, the first Republican to do so since George W. Bush in 2004.  

In addition, Republicans convincingly captured control of the Senate. They also managed to hang on to their historically slim House majority by their fingernails. 

Democrats inexplicably appear to be surprised at the results.

Daniel Perry, a marine veteran, was charged with manslaughter for holding Jordan Neely in a choke-hold on the F train in Manhattan. Neely had been threatening subway riders before Perry intervened. In the event, the jury returned a not guilty verdict in what was widely seen as a rebuke to New York DA Alvin Bragg for prosecuting the case to begin with.

Syria’s 14 year civil war has apparently come to an end and the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria has finally collapsed. Israel has devastated Hamas; Hezbollah has been severely wounded. Further, Israel has decapitated the leadership of both Hamas and Hezbollah.   

Partly as a consequence, Iran’s geopolitical weakness has been exposed. Iran’s “ring of fire” strategy of surrounding Israel with surrogates has failed. But we need to be clear-eyed about all this. There aren’t any good guys in the Syria saga. And Bashar al-Assad is now enjoying the sunny climes of Moscow. 

The fate of Ukraine is up in the air. So is the path forward for Vladimir Putin. The plans Xi Jing Ping has for Taiwan remain unknown and perhaps unknowable. 

Luigi Mangione, a 2020 graduate of the University of Pennsylvania, has been charged with the murder of United Health Care CEO Brian Thompson. The murder of Thompson is actually being celebrated in some quarters. Taylor Lorenz, formerly of the Washington Post and New York Times, is one of the cheerleaders in this regard. Here for instance is what she posted on Bluesky “People have very justified hatred toward insurance company CEOs because these executives are responsible for an unfathomable amount of death and suffering,”. 

A little context here. There are some people expressing shock that the apparently pre-meditated assassination of Thompson is being celebrated in some quarters. But there is no reason to be shocked. It is part and parcel of what historian Richard Hofstadter called the paranoid style of American politics. 

When in the 1960s H Rap Brown (not one of my favorites) said that “… violence is necessary. Violence is a part of America’s culture. It is as American as cherry pie” he was not wrong. We have gone through several violent eras, of which the latest is but one example. 

We had, for instance, violent resistance to the Civil Rights movement in the 1950s and 1960s. Who can forget Lester Maddox, axe in hand, standing in the schoolhouse door? Or Bull Connor unleashing the dogs on Civil Rights protesters? Or the Vietnam war protests that turned violent; or the bombings that several campuses experienced? Or race riots in the cities? Or the anti-globalization protests of the 2000s? How about the Black Lives Matter demonstrations that CNN described as “mostly peaceful”? 

Unfortunately, we do not suffer from a lack of examples of politically inspired violence. Perhaps though, we can step back, take stock and allow reason to dominate the discourse rather than bumper sticker slogans. That shouldn’t be asking too much. 

JFB 

Please follow and like us:
fb-share-icon
Tweet
Posted in Politics | Comments Off on Violence in America etc

Fascism etc.

Posted on October 27, 2024 by Joe Benning

It is a time honored quadrennial. In the weeks leading up to the vote for the US Presidency, there is the traditional rending of garments over the mere possibility that a Republican will win the race. At which point Democratic  bien pensants begin to claim that the Republican candidate is a racist; has displayed a shocking tendency toward fascism, and that there is a whiff of fascism in the air etc.etc. 

Current VP and Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris has managed to hit a new low in this respect. She actually accused Donald Trump of being a real live fascist. 

The expected cast of characters, this time including Hillary Clinton, John Kelly and Mark Milley, accordingly jumped in and denounced Trump’s supposed fascism. What they actually denounced (perhaps unknowingly because they don’t understand what fascism actually entails) is authoritarianism. 

Let’s face it. Donald Trump, without a doubt, has displayed authoritarian tendencies. He obviously enjoys, or at least makes a good show of getting along with dictators. Russia’s Vladimir Putin, Hungary’s Viktor Orban, Turkey’s Recep Erdoğan, China’s Xi Jinping and a host of others easily come to mind. It’s pretty hard to imagine Ronald Reagan palling around with this crowd. 

There are actually two questions here. (1) Is it all an act on Trump’s part? And (2) more importantly, philosophically speaking what is fascism as opposed to authoritarianism. 

First question first. Is it all an act? Damned if I know. I doubt that even Trump knows. After all, he is not known—to put it mildly— for making subtle distinctions. Not to put too fine a point on it, quoting Trump as saying he wants Generals like Hitler’s is not exactly dispositive. Anybody who is even vaguely familiar with modern history knows that a number of Hitler’s Generals plotted to assassinate him. Which, assuming Trump actually said what he is accused of saying, speaks to his ignorance (no surprise there) and that of his accusers. 

Having said that, there is precious little actual evidence that Trump really has fascist leanings. Being a jerk does not equate to fascism. And hysterical assertions do not count as evidence. 

It is the second question that is most interesting. Leaving aside the obligatory rhetorical nonsense, that question asks what fascism actually is. For that we can consult one of fascism’s chief practitioners and theorists. That would be Benito Mussolini. 

Three quotations of his sum it up. 

Here is the first. “Anti-individualistic, the Fascist conception of life stresses the importance of the state and accepts the individual only insofar as his interests coincide with those of the state, which stands for the conscience and the universal will of man as a historic entity.”

Here is the second. “The keystone of the Fascist doctrine is its conception of the state, of its essence, its functions, and its aims. For Fascism the state is absolute; individuals and groups relative. Individuals and groups are admissible insofar as they come within the state.”

And the third. “The Fascist state organizes the nation, but it leaves the individual adequate elbow room. It has curtailed useless or harmful liberties while preserving those which are essential. In such matters the individual cannot be the judge, but the state only.”

Now, who does that sound like? It sounds a lot like progressive activists. For example the fascist state accepts individuals only insofar as their interests coincide with the interests of the state. The interests of individuals are subordinate to the whims of the state. “Harmful” liberties should be curtailed.

Curtailing allegedly harmful liberties sounds an awful lot like punishing the publication of what the state labels “misinformation”. That is a practice enthusiastically endorsed by Kamala Harris and Tim Walz. And the Biden Administration for that matter. 

Let’s not forget that it was the Biden Administration that pressured media companies to suppress stories contrary to their preferred Covid 19 narrative. And it was the 2020 Biden Campaign that got 51 members of the “intelligence community” to assert that the Hunter Biden laptop story was Russian disinformation. That particular effort in news suppression was spearheaded by Anthony Blinken who is now Secretary of State. How does that grab you for freedom of the press?

It should not go unmentioned that Donald Trump, no friend of individual liberties, has called for loosening the restrictions for suing reporters. We do have a first amendment the Supreme Court has steadfastly upheld (see Times v Sullivan) to prevent just this sort of thing.   Unlike Harris and progressives, he has not called for packing the court. 

And then there is the way that the Administrative state functions. Congress passes aspirations they call laws and sends them off to the executive bureaucracy to write the rules for implementation. That is where real policy making is done. In that process the interests of the politically well-connected, not the interests of the individual, largely determine outcomes.

Even consider an area where progressives pretend to protect individual rights, which is to say abortion policy. For abortion policy-making, individuals are the last thing that most progressives care about. Instead, people are subdivided into interest groups: Women vs Men vs unborn children.  

The reason is simple. Unborn children don’t vote. They don’t get a say, any more than slaves did in the antebellum South. And men, who are increasingly Republican, are defined as cretins. Or as Hilary Clinton put it, “deplorables”. 

Let’s present a hypothetical. Suppose the Democrats (by which I mean Party officials and office holders) really believed that Trump is a proto fascist. Then why did they spend so much time and effort trying to propel Trump toward the Republican nomination? The answer is they thought (possibly correctly) that he would be the easiest Republican to beat. 

Another question: why are endangered Democratic Senators who are up for re-election running ads claiming that they have worked constructively with Trump? 

These Senators include Sherrod Brown, (D—OH), Bob Casey (D—PA), and Tammy Baldwin (D—WI) all of whom are locked in tight races. 

Are they fascist sympathizers themselves? Of course not. They simply want to win and they are afraid Harris will drag them down to defeat. So they (partially) align themselves with Trump, whom they know is not a fascist.  

It is possible that both Trump and Harris are well aware of all this and are simply employing different campaign tactics in a desperate lunge for power. But those tactics are destructive. Words have meanings. Continuing to dilute or obfuscate those meanings makes discussion about politics and public policy even more threadbare than it already is. We should not be headed in that direction. 

JFB

Please follow and like us:
fb-share-icon
Tweet
Posted in Political Philosophy, Politics | Comments Off on Fascism etc.

You Can’t Feign Surprise

Posted on October 24, 2024 by Joe Benning

A Tim Walz appointee speaks. Link Below.

https://x.com/nickineily/status/1839302520310571174

JFB

Please follow and like us:
fb-share-icon
Tweet
Posted in Politics | Comments Off on You Can’t Feign Surprise