John Hussman Describes The Recent Victory Of Global Fascism, Without Using The Term

Just yesterday, in his column, here:

[O]ver the past 15 years, the global financial system . . . has been transformed into a self-serving, grotesque casino that misallocates scarce savings, begs for and encourages speculative bubbles, refuses to restructure bad debt, and demands that the most reckless stewards of capital should be rewarded through bailouts that transfer bad debt from private balance sheets to the public balance sheet.

What is central here is that the government policy environment has encouraged this result. This environment includes financial sector deregulation that was coupled with a government backstop, repeated monetary distortions, refusal to restructure bad debt, and a preference for policy cowardice that included bailouts and opaque accounting. Deregulation and lower taxes will not fix this problem, nor will larger "stimulus packages."  

New Federal Reserve Capital Requirements May Doom Savings and Loans

And putting savings and loans out of business will dramatically reduce competition in the mortgage business, which is negative for housing, and borrowers, going forward.

Moral hazard. Picking winners and losers. Fascism, American-style.

Story here.

FDIC's New Liquidation Authority Under Dodd-Frank Latest Example Of Obama Fascism

It's not fascism when we do it.

Peter Wallison for Bloomberg.com doesn't come right out and say it, of course, but the FDIC's new liquidation authority under Dodd-Frank is the very embodiment of Obama's fascist vision for America and a crucial instrument for its implementation:

Under the plan, the agency would create a bridge institution to assume the assets and liabilities of a failed firm and could force some creditors to take equity in place of their debt holdings. ...

The powers granted by the liquidation authority to the secretary of the Treasury are unprecedented. With the concurrence of the Federal Reserve and the FDIC, the secretary can seize any financial firm -- not just the largest ones -- if he believes its failure would cause instability in the U.S. financial system.

If the firm’s directors object to the seizure, the secretary can apply to a U.S. district court for an order authorizing him to appoint the FDIC as receiver. The court has one day -- yes, one day -- to decide whether the secretary’s judgment was correct. If the court takes no action within this window, the firm is turned over to the FDIC. It’s a felony to disclose that the secretary has applied for the court order. The constitutional issues here are obvious and breathtaking. ...

Essentially, there’s no appeal. The secretary’s seizure isn’t subject to a stay or injunction, and once the firm has been delivered into the arms of the FDIC, it’s as good as dead.

Read the entire column, here.

Thomas Sowell Agrees With Us: Obama Is A Fascist

Thomas Sowell for Investors.com correctly locates Obama's socialism in the fascist vein:

What President Obama has been pushing for, and moving toward, is more insidious: government control of the economy, while leaving ownership in private hands. That way, politicians get to call the shots but, when their bright ideas lead to disaster, they can always blame those who own businesses in the private sector. ...

One of the reasons why both pro-Obama and anti-Obama observers may be reluctant to see him as fascist is that both tend to accept the prevailing notion that fascism is on the political right, while it is obvious that Obama is on the political left. ...

What socialism, fascism and other ideologies of the left have in common is an assumption that some very wise people — like themselves — need to take decisions out of the hands of lesser people, like the rest of us, and impose those decisions by government fiat.

Read the complete column, here.

Liberal Massachusetts Town Institutes Fines For Public Swearing

The move actually de-criminalizes public swearing in order to remove it from the penumbra of First Amendment applications, as reported here:

Middleborough, a town of about 20,000 residents perhaps best known for its rich cranberry bogs, has had a bylaw against public profanity since 1968. But because that bylaw essentially makes cursing a crime, it has rarely if ever been enforced, officials said, because it simply would not merit the time and expense to pursue a case through the courts.

The ordinance would decriminalize public profanity, allowing police to write tickets as they would for a traffic violation. It would also decriminalize certain types of disorderly conduct, public drinking and marijuana use, and dumping snow on a roadway.

Just another expression of the reactionary impulse and not really a bona fide idea, an irritable mental gesture which only resembles an idea, right?

Americans' Net Worth Drops 40%, 55% For Those Whose Home Is Their Primary Savings

So says the Federal Reserve in a just released report here:

[T]he decreases in median net worth appear to have been driven most strongly by a broad collapse in house prices. ... The decline in median net worth was especially large for families in groups where housing was a larger share of assets, such as families headed by someone 35 to 44 years old (median net worth fell 54.4 percent) and families in the West region (median net worth fell 55.3 percent). ... Although the overall level of debt owed by families was basically unchanged, debt as a percentage of assets rose because the value of the underlying assets (especially housing) decreased faster.

Meanwhile, Obama has focused his laser-like vision on his golf game and mucking with your healthcare while blowing off the real crisis in America. 

So much for not letting a good one go to waste, eh Rahm?

Hey Obama! I Got Your Private Sector Right Here! Jerk.

Wow. Now The Obama "Cool" Is Racist, Too.

What isn't?

Story here:

"There's an ad, talking about [how] the president is too cool, [asking] is he too cool? And there's this music that reminds me of, you know, some of the blaxploitation films from the 70s playing in the background, him with his sunglasses," Rye said. "And to me it was just very racially-charged. They weren't asking if Bush was too cool, but, yet, people say that that's the number one person they'd love to have a beer with. So, if that's not cool I dont know what is.

She added that "even 'cool,' the term 'cool,' could in some ways be deemed racial [in this instance]."

Under Obama, Federal Government Hiring Actually Is Up 0.85 Percent, State/Local Down

Calculated to date from February 1, 2009, federal hiring under Obama is actually up almost 1 percent even though federal tax revenues are broadly down.

State and local governments have cut payrolls by 2.2 and 3.5 percent to date from Feb. 1, 2009, respectively, in an environment of declining revenues due to income stagnation, massive unemployment in the private sector, and declining property tax revenues due to the implosion of housing values.

View the data here, here, and here.

It doesn't make sense that state and local governments are doing their fair share while the federal government is not.

Obama should practice what he preaches.

John Tamny Exposes National Review's Conservatism As Monetarist Currency Devaluation

For Forbes.com, here:

Beckworth and Ponnuru . . . seek money creation to achieve economic growth, or to quote them directly, “central banks would be required to try to keep nominal spending growing at a certain rate” through 5% annual money growth. They bemoan “nominal spending” that “is currently far below the pre-crisis trend”, and remarkably they believe the Fed can remedy this by virtue of gunning the money supply.

Of course missed by the writers is that all demand in any economy results from the provision of supply first (Say’s Law, as one would expect, merits no mention in their manifesto), so to boost the demand, you don’t devalue the currency as they would like to; instead you stabilize the currency so that liquid investors feel comfortable offering up capital to producers. Schumpeter understood that there are no entrepreneurs (and no production) without capital, but if the desire is to devalue the currency then investable capital is naturally going to dry up; that or migrate toward the inflation hedges of yesterday as it did in the ‘70s and since 2001.

An Historicist Explanation Of Fascism Which Unintentionally Describes America

Seen here:

"Fascism resulted from the mobilization of mass armies, the creation of command economies, and the problem of reintegrating veterans into war-torn societies."

Is there a better explanation than this for what happened in America since The Great Depression, whose presidents have drawn their inspiration, now more, now less, from the strong men of Europe as mediated through the legacy of FDR?

In America the creation of the command economy preceded the mobilization for the world war, but the twin developments set the conditions for the state's new role in American life. 

American-style fascism bloomed in The Great Depression and Second World War and then grew through the post-war cult of education, with its original GI Loan Program writ ever larger year by year with newer names and until finally nationalized under Barack Obama, who owes his political success not to the Marxist socialists who inspired and bank-rolled his education but to Chicagoans whose financial success in real estate depended upon government planning, cooperation and exploitation of the poor. He is the epitome of the strangely blended system. 

The proliferation of American fascism occurred through the decades-long expansion of minor educational institutions, cow colleges and junior colleges into degraded and degrading universities which came to elevate the promise of mere vulgar employment to the status of an educated person's learned and wise perspective. A Bachelor's Degree in Physical Education became the equivalent of one in mathematics, and the sixth grade teacher seriously asks the students today to bring an empty white business "envelop" to the next class.

If an education no longer results in gainful employment, we are told, a sin has been committed against education's one and only commandment: Thou shalt get a credential for a job. From fund-raisers who call university alumni to the Rush Limbaughs and Dave Ramseys of the world, an education in a traditional department of human knowledge which fails to lead to employment is useless and worthless.  

Today there are hopeful signs of acute crisis in this consensus even as it reaches its zenith.

Participants graduate with crushing loads of debt in a new environment of depressed wages, long before they have good jobs, spouses, homes, cars and children.

And while the fields of graduates are white unto harvest and they continue to be recruited on-site by big businesses, many of which are responsible for key program funding for the system itself, the number of available jobs has shrunk dramatically as low American GDP resembles present day Europe more than it does its own much more vibrant past. It's as if the system has reached its limit to perpetuate itself.

The lesser products of the universities end up as functionaries in government union shops in the public school system or as media mouthpieces whose job it is to promote the jobs message, but declining tax revenues in the states and diffusion of media due to technology change the calculus for career-minded teachers and "information" workers. As we've seen in Wisconsin, the people who must pay and pay and pay again have had enough. And today's pad will doubtless become yesterday's laptop.

Those not yet quite up to the college experience who can't get an assembly line job because there aren't any may hope to join the military with the promise of money for education later, after the tour of duty. But the prospects for duty look less likely to include personnel-rich adventurism going forward as drone-war proliferates. Out-of-shape teenagers and malcontents in any event will find it increasingly difficult to join a shrinking all-volunteer military.

The failure of faith in the cult of education will necessarily precede the demise of the system, and it appears to be accomplishing this all by itself by not delivering on its promise. It wouldn't be the first time, but you'd need a useless degree to appreciate that. 

Romney Will Say Anything To Get Elected, Whether It's 1994 Or 2012

Not our guy in 1994. Not our guy in 2006. Not our guy now.

Not our guy ever.

Obama's All Wee-Wee'd Up Because Total Government Employment Is Down 1.03 Million

Government employment at all levels reached its zenith in 2010 at 22.997 million, spiking up dramatically very briefly under Census hiring between April and May 2010, after which it steadily declined. Today it stands at 21.969 million, a drop of 1.028 million from that one-off peak, or 4.5 percent.

More to the point, today's level of government employment was reached for the first time just a few years ago, in 2006, so what's happened is not much of a contraction compared to what happened in private employment, the recent nadir of which was 106.8 million at the end of January 2010.

That level of private employment last prevailed way back in 1998, and from peak to trough is a 7.6 percent decline, over 1.5 times worse than what happened in government jobs.

Private employment today stands at March 2005 levels, no thanks to Obama, but when it comes to shared sacrifice, government today could actually stand to give up some more jobs, say 229,000 more, all things being equal, to match where the private sector stands historically, which is still behind.

But you won't be hearing that from the Whiner In Chief About Fairness. 

Obama Lies About Private Sector: 4.6 Million Without Jobs Aren't Doing Fine

Private sector employment has plummeted from its peak in late 2007 by 4.6 million. Back then, 115,647,000 worked in the private sector. Today just 111,040,000 do.

Since the recent nadir of private employment in January 2010, 4.2 million have re-entered the work force.

Unfortunately since the beginning of 2008, part-time employment has skyrocketed from 4.9 million to 8.1 million today, calling into question how good are the jobs recovered over the entire period. As recently as September 2011, part-time employment was as high as 9.3 million.

In any event, private employment is back to 2005 levels, which for its time was no achievement. The growth trend in jobs first reached that level back in 2000 and 2001, only to suffer the slings and arrows of the dotcom bubble and 911.

America has not really recovered from that time, otherwise private employment would be far in excess of 120,000,000 today.

The current president has no imagination, despite not being named Bush.

Sean Hannity's Libertarianism Is Stupid

The radio ad for Sean Hannity's program runs incessantly, featuring him saying, "Society doesn't need to put its seal of approval on the choices people make."

This in reference to same sex marriage.

He obviously doesn't appreciate how the government already puts its seal of approval on people's choices, and has done so for a very long time.

The most obvious social example is marriage itself, which receives a healthy tax preference in the form of the tax code's filing status "married filing jointly" . . . since the end of the Second World War! This isn't just a seal of approval. It's actually a financial encouragement to marry.

Or consider the child tax credit, which you aren't going to get without having children. With it, the government encourages the having of children.

Or the earned income credit, which you don't get unless you have some earned income. It's government's way of encouraging people who don't work at all to get a job and get work experience, on the assumption that they will move up the ladder eventually to positions which pay too much to receive the credit.

All of these things the government encourages to promote social stability in the form of nuclear families, home ownership, work, and population growth, all of which are essential to . . . tax revenue.

Giving same sex partners the same rewards as heterosexual unions ignores the fact that the former are naturally incapable of growing the population. Government has no interest in promoting the ineffectual.

"Be it then, as Sir Robert says, that anciently it was usual for men to sell and castrate their children, Observations, 155. Let it be, that they exposed them; add to it, if you please, for this is still greater power, that they begat them for their tables, to fat and eat them: if this proves a right to do so, we may, by the same argument, justify adultery, incest and sodomy, for there are examples of these too, both ancient and modern; sins, which I suppose have their principal aggravation from this, that they cross the main intention of nature, which willeth the increase of mankind, and the continuation of the species in the highest perfection, and the distinction of families, with the security of the marriage bed, as necessary thereunto."

-- John Locke

New Evidence Proves Obama Was Member Of Socialist Third Party In 1996

And lied about it in 2008 to get elected president.

So claims Stanley Kurtz for National Review:

Recently obtained evidence from the updated records of Illinois ACORN at the Wisconsin Historical Society now definitively establishes that Obama was a member of the New Party. He also signed a “contract” promising to publicly support and associate himself with the New Party while in office.

Minutes of the meeting on January 11, 1996, of the New Party’s Chicago chapter read as follows:

Barack Obama, candidate for State Senate in the 13th Legislative District, gave a statement to the membership and answered questions. He signed the New Party “Candidate Contract” and requested an endorsement from the New Party. He also joined the New Party.

Consistent with this, a roster of the Chicago chapter of the New Party from early 1997 lists Obama as a member, with January 11, 1996, indicated as the date he joined.

Knowing that Obama disguised his New Party membership helps make sense of his questionable handling of the 2008 controversy over his ties to ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now). During his third debate with John McCain, Obama said that the “only” involvement he’d had with ACORN was to represent the group in a lawsuit seeking to compel Illinois to implement the National Voter Registration Act, or motor-voter law. The records of Illinois ACORN and its associated union clearly contradict that assertion, as I show in my political biography of the president, Radical-in-Chief: Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism.

Why did Obama deny his ties to ACORN? The group was notorious in 2008 for thug tactics, fraudulent voter registrations, and its role in popularizing risky subprime lending. Admitting that he had helped to fund ACORN’s voter-registration efforts and train some of their organizers would doubtless have been an embarrassment but not likely a crippling blow to his campaign. So why not simply confess the tie and make light of it? The problem for Obama was ACORN’s political arm, the New Party.

The revelation in 2008 that Obama had joined an ACORN-controlled, leftist third party could have been damaging indeed, and coming clean about his broader work with ACORN might easily have exposed these New Party ties. Because the work of ACORN and the New Party often intersected with Obama’s other alliances, honesty about his ties to either could have laid bare the entire network of his leftist political partnerships.

Although Obama is ultimately responsible for deceiving the American people in 2008 about his political background, he got help from his old associates.

Read the whole story here.

Sweden's Economic Miracle Partly Due To Cutting Spending By 20 Percent Of GDP

So says Anders Aslund for Bloomberg.com:

Not so long ago, Sweden could claim world leadership in unmitigated Keynesian economics, with a 90 percent marginal tax rate and a welfare state second to none.

Now Swedes look at the conflict between the U.S. and German examples over whether more spending or more austerity is the key to financial salvation, and for them the choice is easy: Germany was right. Northern Europe harbors no sympathy for the spendthrifts of Southern Europe.

Americans still think of Sweden as a tightly regulated social-welfare state, but in the last two decades the country has been reformed. Public spending has fallen by no less than one-fifth of gross domestic product, taxes have dropped and markets have opened up.

The situation is similar in the other Scandinavian countries, the Baltic nations and Poland. But no turnabout has been as dramatic as Sweden’s.

Read the rest, here.

"The Banking System Is Incompatible With Public Safety And Prosperity"

So wrote Thomas Jefferson to Richard Rush, in 1819.

Read why here.

NAACP's Endorsement Of SS Marriage Causes Leader From Iowa To Resign

Yah man! Hallelujah!

Story here.

EU's Equivalents Of US FDIC Can't Cover Even 1 Percent Of Eligible Deposits In Bank Failure

According to a March 2011 policy brief from the European Credit Research Institute, here:

The [European] Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) collected data from all DGS [Deposit Guarantee Schemes] in the EU to examine the ability to handle payouts (JRC, 2008). It revealed that the coverage ratio in most countries is not even sufficient to protect 1% of eligible deposits . . ..

. . . [T]he JRC carried out a ‘stress-testing’ exercise, which confirmed the weaknesses of EU DGS to handle payouts. Three different scenarios were tested, taking into account the availability of funding (ex ante, ex post and borrowing of funds):

•Small-impact scenario: €100 million average financial burden

•Medium-impact scenario: €2.18 billion average financial burden

•High-impact scenarios: €8.69 billion average financial burden

Results showed that all EU DGS could cover a small-impact bank failure. A medium-sized failure could be borne by seven EU countries with the highest coverage ratios using only ex ante funds. Six member states would not be able to reimburse depositor claims in the medium-impact case, even if they used all available funding, including ex post funds and additional borrowing. No member state was well-equipped to cope with a large failure using only ex ante funds.

To date in the current crisis, the US FDIC has paid out in excess of $88 billion. It appears the EU equivalents can't pay out even 10 billion euros. All guarantee schemes are individual member country responsibility.