 |
| . . . the light at the end of the tunnel has been turned off. |
Friday, April 6, 2012
Labor Force Participation Rate at 63.8 Was Last Matched in April 1983
The data are available here.
The percentage of people working relative to the total population has consistently and decisively fallen under Obama:
Headline Unemployment Falls to 8.2 Percent, Forecast Jobs Miss By 40 Percent
The report is here.
Jobs fell short of the forecast 200,000 by only 80,000.
Oops.
Markets are closed for Good Friday. Futures are sharply lower:
Markets are closed for Good Friday. Futures are sharply lower:
Thursday, April 5, 2012
Prof. Stephen Presser Says Obama Should Be Ashamed Of Himself About Activism Charge
For CNN.com no less, here:
"[I]t is the task of the Supreme Court to rein in majoritarian legislatures when they go beyond what the Constitution permits.
"This is not, as Obama implies, judicial activism, or political activity on the part of the justices. This is simply, as Hamilton explained, fidelity to the Constitution itself, fidelity to the highest expression of "We the People of the United States," the body whose representatives ratified that Constitution. ...
"Judicial review is not usurpation -- it is the manner in which the rule of law is preserved in this nation. It is certainly true that sometimes courts, and even the Supreme Court, have erred in their interpretation of the Constitution, and some legislative acts that clearly were permitted by the Constitution have been struck down. But if the ACA's individual mandate is rejected, this will be fully within the legitimate exercise of judicial powers. ...
"If, as it should, the Supreme Court declares the individual mandate unconstitutional, it will be reaffirming our traditions, and not usurping them. The president, a former constitutional law teacher, should be ashamed of himself."
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
Yuval Levin Notices Obama Suffers From Liberal Projection Syndrome
Here:
"[Obama] speaks as though the problem—our unsustainable entitlement state—were the solution, and as though the solution—a budget that restrains the growth of spending, modernizes and reforms our collapsing entitlement and welfare programs to avert their collapse, and charts a path toward economic growth—were the problem. In this upside-down, inside-out world, Barack Obama accuses Paul Ryan of putting the future of America’s younger generation in danger and inviting American decline.
"A psychologist might call this projection."
There Is No Lie Obama Will Not Tell
"Franklin Roosevelt called the [National Recovery Act of 1933] 'the most important and far-reaching ever enacted by the American Congress.' But that didn’t stop the Supreme Court from overturning it in May 1935, by a vote of 9-0.
"The National Recovery Act passed the House by a large majority and the Senate by 46-39. The “strong majority” mentioned by Obama in the passage of Obamacare did not exist. . . . It garnered not a single Republican vote in either house, the first time so important a piece of legislation was passed on a totally partisan basis.
"As I said, one can only admire his chutzpah. It seems there is simply no lie President Obama will not tell in pursuit of his agenda. He can count on the mainstream media buying it, but will anyone else?"
-- John Steele Gordon, "Presidential Chutzpah"
Don't miss the full opinion, here.
Tuesday, April 3, 2012
On Political Violence
-- George Orwell on Adolf Hitler, 1940
Evidently Obama Learned Hostility Toward Marbury v. Madison (1803) at Harvard Law
From an editorial in The Wall Street Journal, pointing out there would be nothing unprecedented in the Supreme Court overturning ObamaCare:
In Marbury in 1803, Chief Justice John Marshall laid down the doctrine of judicial review. In the 209 years since, the Supreme Court has invalidated part or all of countless laws on grounds that they violated the Constitution. All of those laws were passed by a "democratically elected" legislature of some kind, either Congress or in one of the states. And no doubt many of them were passed by "strong" majorities.
Read the full opinion rebuking Obama's complaint about judicial activism here.
I don't buy the argument that Obama is ignorant of these fundamentals of the history of American law. I think he's hostile towards them, and wants them all swept away, along with the Constitution.
Without Low Valuations and Widespread Skepticism, True Bull Markets Are Not Born
From Joseph Calhoun at Alhambrapartners.com:
"Bull markets are born from low valuations and widespread skepticism, neither of which is extant in the current environment. At best, stocks are currently at average historical valuations; at worst, based on measures such as the Shiller P/E, they are considerably overvalued. Sentiment, as measured by the various surveys, is approaching euphoric levels. I don’t know yet what will upset the bullish mood but the last few years have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that when it happens, the move down will not be pleasant for the fully invested."
Read the full entry here.
John Hussman Notices Troubling Upward Revisions to Initial Claims Data
And remarks how few others have noticed:
"[W]e've been watching the new unemployment claims data for some time. Almost without fail, when a new number is released, the new claims figure for the previous week is revised upward by about 3000 or so. Last week, we saw an unusual revision in new claims data, not just for the previous week, but in months of prior releases, with upward revisions averaging about 10,000 in the most recent reports (e.g. the Feb 25 figure was revised from 354,000 to 373,000). ... Given that so much investor enthusiasm has focused on the new claims figures, it's interesting that the large and generally upward revisions in months of prior data seemed to go virtually unnoticed."
Read his complete remarks here.
Monday, April 2, 2012
Obama Calls Supremes "An Unelected Group of People" Like That's a Problem
It took him long enough, except all we've really learned is that he thinks that's wrong and that the Supremes should be elected, or subservient to the Congress, at his beck and call, or something.
Here's the line:
"That an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law."
Here's the source.
Isn't it the argument of the likes of Obama that the Civil War was fought to overturn the duly constituted and passed laws upheld by the Supremes' Dred Scott decision?
Just doing our job, sir.
A tirade like this from a president should be an automatic verdict against the law, just to put him in his place for a change, since no one else seems to have the balls to do it.
A tirade like this from a president should be an automatic verdict against the law, just to put him in his place for a change, since no one else seems to have the balls to do it.
Current Federal Spending Implies a Head Tax of $12,338 on Every Man, Woman, Child
$3.8 trillion in spending divided by population of 308 million equals $12,338 per person this fiscal year, including every baby and everyone in a nursing home.
It would probably be as popular as was Margaret Thatcher's Community Charge.
But it might drive out the illegals.
When the People Lose Control of the Public Finances, Tyranny Often Follows
Herbert Hoover has captured the imagination of a number of writers recently, from Walter Russell Mead to R. Christopher Whalen.
Now James Grant weighs in too at The Wall Street Journal, here, contrasting Hoover's fear of tyranny with our desire for it:
Herbert Hoover, who learned a thing or two about debt and adversity, warned in his memoirs that, unless the dollar was convertible into gold, the people would lose control of the public finances, "their first defense against tyranny." Simon Johnson and James Kwak, the authors of "White House Burning: The Founding Fathers, Our National Debt, and Why It Matters to You" could not seem to disagree more. To them, the problem today isn't paper money but a government that hovers too little and taxes too lightly. More regulation—especially financial regulation—and selectively higher taxes are the answers, they contend. ...
Johnson and Kwak are special pleaders. Human life being uncertain, they wish to protect us from it. How much risk of sickness, unemployment or indigence do you, a mere individual, wish to bear on your own? "The question we leave you with is this," the pair write: "Are you and your family willing to face these risks alone, not knowing what will happen in the future, or do you want to live in a society that will protect you from misfortunes that lie beyond your control? For that is what the debate over the national debt boils down to, and its outcome depends on you."
More than likely, the outcome does not depend on you, whoever you are. It rather turns on the intellectual climate in which the people at the top frame public choices.
And Mr. Grant makes another good case for the choice of free men: gold.
Sunday, April 1, 2012
Why Obama Loves Condoms
His condoms allow for . . . inflation!
His condoms halt . . . production!
His condoms destroy . . . the next generation!
His condoms protect . . . a bunch of pricks!
His condoms make you feel protected . . . while you're getting screwed!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)