$nip>
Warning: this black swan won't be pretty, will shock, soon
His bottom line: "The day of national reckoning has arrived. We will not have a conventional business recovery now, but rather a long hangover of debt liquidation and downsizing ... it's a pity that the modern Republican party offers the American people an irrelevant platform of recycled Keynesianism when the old approach -- balanced budgets, sound money and financial discipline -- is needed more than ever."
Wrong: There are far bigger things to "pity."
First, that most Americans, 300 million, are helpless, will do nothing, sit in the bleachers passively watching this deadly partisan game like it's just another TV reality show.
Second, that, unfortunately, politicians are so deep-in-the-pockets of the Wall Street conspiracy that controls Washington they are helpless and blind.
And third, there's a depressing sense that Stockman will be dismissed as a traitor, his message lost in the 24/7 news cycle ... until the final apocalyptic event, an unpredictable black swan triggers another, bigger global meltdown, followed by a long Great Depression II and a historic class war.
So be prepared, it will hit soon, when you least expect.
$nip>
GOP? Marxists?
The Bankers appear to have
gotten the most money.
PreOBAMA -—— NASA 10 billion per year
PostOBAMA —— NASA servant to the 57 States
-——————— Bankers 2000+? billion per year + Sharia
LOL... Got me!
I knew when I clicked on this thread that it would be just another story by the Democrat “mainstream” newsrooms who, yet again, went back to the David Stockman well for source material to use against... Reagan and the Republicans. Good old David Stockman, always available to the scumbag Democrat “mainstream” newsrooms whenever they need a “Republican” to blame for the latest economic woes.
(yawn)
Another liberal wet dream.. Senile old Reagan backstabber runs his mouth like Jimmuh Carter, and they all swoon over the “revelation”
Stockman is a moron.
LLS
“300 million, are helpless, will do nothing”???? What do you want them to do? Storm Washington? We have elected officials to handle the policys of this country. November showed them what the people want. If Republicans don’t bring the spending under control, cut spending, stop the wars and bring our troops home........after 10 years of war, the people will get rid of them also. As these politicians are run out of office, Republican and Democrats, people will vote in others that will take a more proactive stand. States should watch their representatives and recall if them, if possible, if they don’t do what the states want. Control your states and you control Washington.
At least 43% of the 300 million cannot be counted on to help the recovery.
Stockman bankrupted his company and was lucky he did not get indicted for securities fraud. Funny that they never mention that when they write about his opinions.
Stockman reduces his credibility when he blames it on Reagan. He apparently is not cognizant of the fact that Obama has wriiten twice as much debt in just two years than Reagan did in eight. And Obama is in charge now so why blame Reagan, who’s been dead for years?
I’ll give you the answer: Stockman is still bitter because Reagan “took him to the woodshed” 30 years ago.
I think that the original idea - the Howard Jarvis idea - that limiting taxation would limit the size and the scope of government - has been proven false.
To the extent that the GOP has used its power to limit taxes but not spending - and that they’ve adopted the idiotic mantra “cut taxes so that the government will have MORE to spend” - then I think accusing the GOP of destroying the economy is fair.
The Republicans were certainly complicit, but not the only, or even the leading cause. Two key faults that I saw:
1. They “compromised” with the Democrats, giving them what they wanted (social spending, give-aways and moving more individuals off the tax rolls) in return for what the Repub’s wanted (mostly tax-cuts and strong military).
2. They got addicted to the spending as well. When they saw no voter backlash against the Democrats’ spending, they thought they could do the same. An example was them being too clever by half, pushing and passing the prescription drug bill, thinking this would lock up the votes of the over-65 crowd forever (it didn’t, and now it is another “third-rail” issue).
This is what happens when you abandon (or have no) principals.
Yes, massive new taxes and higher debt and strangling the economy with regulations like Cap N Trade would have the economy hopping.
/sarc
stuntman is an idiot and a shill for the other team
The main thing wrong with this article is that its indictment is partisan. The truth is that both political parties are to blame.
Stockman is not disappointed in Democrats for behaving like liberal Keynesian panderers. That’s to be expected. He’s disappointed in Republicans for behaving like liberal Keynsian panderers, which their leadership did with few exceptions.
In essence, the article is critical of two intellectuals who offered revolutionary approaches to resolving the malaise of the 1970s: Milton Friedman and Authur Laffer.
Friedman was a genuine champion of liberty, but his theory on floating exchange rates was fatally flawed because it assumed that the USG, the Fed, and other central banks would behave responsibly and make decisions with a long-term time horizon. His rationale was that politicians and central bankers would respond to market signals, and that US politicians and the FRB in particular would act to preserve the dollar’s value in a manner befitting the reserve currency of the world.
Laffer correctly argued that, if set too high, increases in tax rates can actually reduce tax revenues. This is obvious to anybody who works for a living, but many Democrats can’t comprehend this fact. Laffer’s famous curve also indicates that that there is a revenue-maximizing rate at which any reduction in tax rates reduces tax revenues. This, too, should be obvious, but it escapes many Republicans. In the 1980s, Laffer argued that the best way to cut the deficit was to reduce income tax rates, and thereby stimulate economic growth and increase tax revenues. The fatal flaw in this theory was that it did not address USG spending and regulation. It assumed that the USG would behave responsibly and make decisions with a long-term time horizon. Politicians and pundits talked about cutting spending, but instead Congress spent every additional dollar of tax revenue and a whole lot more. And it wasn’t just the Democrats. George W. Bush touted Medicare Part D, the largest new welfare entitlement program in fifty years, as a proud accomplishment. Only 19 House Republicans voted against Medicare Part D.
Thus, the monetary and fiscal ideas of Friedman and Laffer suffer from the same flaw: they assume that it is possible to have good government, one that behaves reponsibly with a long-term time horizon. Through the 20th century, the USG was probably the least bad government in human history, but even it failed.
Ronald Reagan put it well: “Government is not the solution to our problems; government is the problem.”
Stockman? Nah, I don’t care what he has to say.
However, I wouldn't pessimistically observe that FR is firmly in the pro big-gov't corner, and that there doesn't seem to be any remaining bastion of free market sentiment.
Rather, I view it as an exciting revelation that there is simply nothing whatsoever that is going to prevent this cluster$uck from occurring.
There are few things in life that are lock solid absolutes - the coming CWII is one of them.
Stockman’s still alive? Or did they dig him up just for this?
The problem which both parties share is that our manufacturing seed corn has been exported to the world. Trade means we buy product from you and you buy product from us. Trade is not we buy product from you and send jobs, factories and Treasuries in return. Clinton started it, Bush put it on steroids and Obama continues it.
Look at the products you buy and see where they were made, that’s where the jobs went. We have to make more of what we import or only Wall Street will recover.
During Ronald Reagan’s administration we started running trade deficits every year and the FIRE (finance, insurance, real estate) sector of the economy started its rise. We slowly gave up being a producing nation and started to become a consumer nation
I’m not blaming RR necessarily but this flip took place when Paul Volker finally let up on interest rates in summer 1982. Volker had started his interest rate clampdown in 1979.
It was aliens.......
Actually - the GOP does bear a portion of the blame - rightfully so. Not only have many in the GOP been just as spend-happy as the Dems... but in the big picture - they didn’t say “NO” and take whatever action necessary to stop the landslide. I firmly believe that is part of what caused the previous turnover of the house and senate (2006 mid-term).
No backbone Republicans are no better than Marxist Democrats.