Showing posts with label fiscal policy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fiscal policy. Show all posts

Jan 20, 2018

Mission Accomplished






































The bill to fund the federal government that looks after a 19 Trillion Dollar economy showed it's dysfunction when political infighting and posturing caused a shortfall of the required 60 votes by the deadline on Friday night.

Without delay, Trump accused the Democrats of putting politics above the interests of the American people, and the Democrats blamed him for rejecting bipartisan compromise proposals. And the Democrat insistence to staple a DACA requirement to the continued funding of the government.

Both teams claim they will keep talking, and the White House budget chief has expressed optimism that a resolution will be found before Monday.

When that doesn't happen, hundreds of thousands of federal workers face the prospect of no work and shuttered offices at the start of the working week.

The last government shutdown was in 2013, and lasted for 16 days. However, any thoughts that a shutdown will actually save taxpayers, it will, in fact, do the opposite. According to Senator Rand Paul - it actually cost taxpayers more. Here's an article, if you care.

Jan 1, 2011

Oh, Those Opulent O’s.

We’ve come to the end of a decade - yes, I start counting my decades by the ones and not the zeroes, which means that 1980 was the last year of the 70’s. I know it looks stupid on paper, but it is the proper way. My reference point would be the classic Onion Headline - “The Millennium Begins in 2001, Terrorists Note.”

In the grand tradition of rehashing old news and making sub-standard lists of events, arbitrary lists of the ‘best’ movies or music, reality television ‘stars’, or worst of all - consumer products - allow me the exercise of looking back with the rose colored glasses of time. I’d like to try to present the previous ten years as it might show up in a history book.

The Opulent O's

Previous eras of the American experience have been labeled, whether accurately or not, by the generations that followed. The eras of the Gilded Age, the Roaring Twenties, or the Fabulous Fifties give an over reaching illusion of wealth and comfort afforded by all the citizenry. Careful study shows that there were major exceptions ranked by class status and race in each of these three examples, and the names themselves discount recessionary times, and any turmoil that existed. However, the tradition of remembrance for a grouping of ten years with a fantastical moniker has become an unfortunate reality of historical narrative when examining the history of America. The era that we are focusing on now is no exception -- the era which begins at the turn of the 21st Century to the new year of 2011 CE. This time has become known as the Opulent O’s.

To first explain the name of the era, the people of the time did not refer to the year in which they lived as the aughts, or oughts as proper English would dictate, or even the example of the generation that lived through the turn of the previous century, the 1900’s. The pronunciation of the year in which they lived predominantly was spoken as, “two thousand and...” followed by the number designate. Hence, why a few historians have refereed to the era as the ‘And’s’. The consensus by reputable sources and careful research has been to designate this time as the ‘Oh’s.’ The evidence in the historical record suggests that the people of the time would sometimes drop the ‘two thousand’ in speech and would simply state, “Oh six,” when giving a descriptor of a year; as an example.

The word Opulent has become to describe the era. The Latin derived definition in English are defined as 1. Having or indicating wealth, and also 2. Abundant or plentiful. Ignoring race or regional exceptions -- the word perfectly defines the era.

The primary fuel of the time was cheap and easily obtained petroleum drilled from the ground. The peak of use of gasoline and plastic derived from oil occurred in this era. The abundance of cheap oil and fuel allowed for cheap food sources. The importance of oil in the life cycle of plant to waste product must be studied to understand the mindset of the time. The availability and sheer amounts of cheap fuel created a cradle-to-grave manufacturing cycle from consumer goods to 4 ton single passenger vehicle with low fuel to kilometer use ratios -- which defines the zeitgeist. The most important aspect, in hindsight, to the lifestyle of the times was the amount of fuel used to create inexpensive food. The petroleum was used in the creation of fertilizer, and copious amounts were used in the entire process of seed to market, and market to aftermarket production.

Simplified, the oil or oil products would be used by the farmer from every aspect of his production -- from the multiple passes on a tractor (soil toiling, planting, chemical pesticide application, cultivation and a final till of the soil), to transport to industrial food processing off site (sometimes thousands of miles) from the farmland. Next, from the secondary processor which would create a chemical byproduct of the original agricultural product (Maize and soybeans being the most popular of the bases found in most supermarkets [see also ADM Corporation] would then transport and package the new product and ship by truck to market. Retail supermarkets [Safeway, Albertsons], “fast food” restaurants [McDonald’s, Chili’s] or superstore retail outlets [Costco, Wal-Mart] would then cater to the final end user, who more often than not, used a single passenger vehicle to transport the product home. Once the product was consumed, the end user simply disposed of the plastic packaging to preserve the food product, and the outer container -- typically another plastic or cardboard package which only served to encourage purchase. Once discarded the packaging materials were then transported by another gas powered truck or transport to take the used goods to be covered in a landfill. The concept of cradle to cradle manufacturing may have germinated in this era, but due to the nature and scale of the single-use economic cycle, it was counter productive or even suicidal for any industry to adopt a plan to reuse or recycle their resources or waste products.

Since fuel and food were inexpensive, the lifestyle of the typical American of the Opulent O’s were filled with store bought conveniences and electronic trinkets designed for obsolescence which encouraged constant replacement. Leveraged credit based upon elevated housing prices allowed consumers buying power. It was not uncommon for an American to have bought a home past their means, and taken credit based on that home’s perceived market value, called a home equity loan. These funds were then used to purchase more consumer goods -- and often with a credit card [MasterCard, Visa]. The economy was primarily based on the spending habits of the consumer. Even after the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, President George W. Bush urged Americans to go to the malls, and purchase houses and cars to get the economy engine moving again. The government created an environment of low interest rates and extremely easy credit in order to facilitate the consumer’s appetite.

Two major military engagements were initiated in response to the sensational terrorist attacks in America, under the banner of a “War on Terrorism.” The engagements in Afghanistan were aided by the Allied Western NATO nations, and the second invasion of Iraq resulted in the replacement of the government there, and a permanent American presence. History has shown, both of these costly involvements were to secure the oil fields, and an attempt to stabilize the region [see also Iran v America 1970-2020] -- thus insuring the flow of inexpensive oil to American business interests. Specifically those partners in Europe and China. Like the citizenry, these foreign entanglements were funded largely by credit. The U.S. had gone from a creditor nation to a debtor nation in 1988, but accelerated during the Bush and Obama Administrations.

Despite the trillions of dollars expended, the price of oil rose as industrial engines of India and China grew their GDP by 20% per year. Oil Prices rose in late 2006 because of simple supply and demand, plus speculation in the commodity markets. Soon, inflation of consumer products, fuel prices, and food began to outpace the threshold of business and consumer expendable incomes. Quickly, the slowdown of consumer spending toppled the preposterous derivative financial products of the time, wiped out the housing speculation and subsequent consumer credit bubble, and exposed widespread institutional Ponzi schemes, not dissimilar to the domino effect experienced at the end of the Roaring 1920’s.

Amazingly, the Six Corporate media companies either were misinformed or incapable of reporting the trends that were creating the problems that led to disaster, and instead reported only soft news (entertainment and sporting events which fed to their other advertising sponsored media concerns), or blatantly perpetuated partisan arguments to fill a 24 hour news cycle with surprisingly low or useless content to their audiences. The news of the day, even as late as 2010, was that of recovery and consumer confidence -- despite under reported or manipulated unemployment figures and a withering manufacturing base. Despite the ineffectual news climate, the government and other influential sources were inserting the word “unsustainable” into the collective vocabulary. At the end of the decade, even to the most optimistic, it seemed that the party was coming to a close. The start of a ‘new normal’ was discussed and contemplated.

Notable Starts: Enhanced government security, social media on networked devices, portable networked computing in communication devices, alternative energy, commercial exploration of space, TEA Party [Taxed Enough Already Party]

Influential Americans: George W. Bush (43rd President), Barack H. Obama (44th President), Larry Page and Sergey Brin, Warren Buffet, Alan Greenspan, Oprah Winfrey, Mark Zuckerburg, Steve Jobs, Sarah Palin.

Human Achievements: Completion of the Human Genome Project, Large Hadron Collider (Switzerland), 2nd Hubble Space Telescope repair by Human Astronauts, extra solar system planetoids discovered, water found on Mars and the Moon.

Notable Disasters: Terrorist Attacks on September 11th, 2001, Hurricane Katrina hits New Orleans and Mississippi, Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill, Global Warming/Climate Change.

Aug 20, 2010

Fringe Wins

Yesterday, on day 576 of his presidency - the Pew Research group decided to publish data that 18% of Americans believe their president is a Muslim.

On the surface - the study almost proves the Trey/Matt postulate that 1/4 of the population is batshiat nuts.

However, in my tiny mind, questions abound...

Why does such a poll take place? Why would they be asking the general population this question? Do we still not know who our President is? Is this because of the Birthers? Is it because he took a stand, then backed away from his stance on the mosque a couple blocks away from the WTC site? Is it because we see Mr. Obama on the golf course rather than a church Pew? Or is because the White House would rather remove the association with Mr. Obama and Rev. Wright? It worked great in Chicago - not so much the rest of the Nation.

So now we have pollsters that have to ask what religion the sitting president follows. Shouldn't we already know that -- that is, if we give a flitting care? Shouldn't that question been figured out before the Iowa Caucasus?

Is this poll more for the newsmakers to make news out of nothing, as most polls are?

Is this just troll bait for the fringe on both sides to kick up the dust - again - for no good reason? Is it a distraction to the equally useless mosque in New York debate? Is it to distract us from the terrible jobs numbers and the complete failure of Keynesian economic policies to help restart the economy's engine?

No matter the intended purpose - the White House stepped in it. They should have kept their mouths shut. They didn't. They now look stupid. Well, more than usual.

Personally, I think he is agnostic and doesn't dare tell anyone. Shhhh.

Jul 2, 2010

Healthcare Update: Health Law Risks Turning Away Sick

The Obama administration has not ruled out turning sick people away from an insurance program created by the new healthcare law to provide coverage for the uninsured. Wait, what? Let me get some popcorn.

Critics of the $5 billion high-risk pool program insist it will run out of money before Jan. 1, 2014. That’s when the program sunsets and health plans can no longer discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions.

Administration officials insist they can make changes to the program to ensure it lasts until 2014, and that it may not have to turn away sick people.

Officials said the administration could also consider reducing benefits under the program, or redistributing funds between state pools. But they acknowledged turning some people away was also a possibility. Now this is getting good.

“There’s a certain amount of money authorized in the statute, and we will do our best to make sure that that amount of money insures as many people as possible and does as much good as possible,” said Jay Angoff, director of the Office of Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). “I think it’s premature to say [what happens] when it’s gone.”

The administration has not discussed asking Congress for more money down the line if the $5 billion runs out before Jan. 1, 2014. Uninsured sick people could start applying for participation in the high-risk insurance pools on Thursday. Hell, three people could burn through that, depending on how they get billed.

Healthcare experts of all stripes warned during the healthcare debate that $5 billion would likely not last until 2014. Millions of Americans cannot find affordable healthcare because of their pre-existing conditions, and that amount would only cover a couple hundred thousand people, according to a recent study by the chief Medicare actuary. Isn't that what I just said?

Republicans continued to hammer that point on Thursday, asking HHS officials to brief them about the program. I'm surprised they're not screaming this point on the roof tops yet. Eh, give them a couple more weeks.

But remember, it's mandatory. So even if they can't cover you, you're still required to buy it.

Tell you what, just walk it off or have an aspirin. And don't call the doctor in the morning. There might be enough left in the bucket for a hearse to stop by and remove your remains.

May 8, 2010

Sunday Comics: Week in Review

Ah, we've finally come to the end of the week.

There was an election. It wasn't definitive, so there's a power grab going on, afterward. And speaking of things going on in Europe...
Looks like the Greek bailout is going to put the entire idea of a European Union into jeopardy. The "I don't want to work" and "give me a check" riots have killed at least 3 people. Insanity and the Welfare State. But don't wag your finger of shame too hard at the E.U. The U.S. has Illinois, California and New York on the the bail out fences as well. California was even considering a complete 'do over' and just giving the state back to the Federal government. Maybe Greece will just be a new part of Germany? ...er, again?
Every time Mr. Obama yells at BP, I know that gas prices are going to go up. Funny that he doesn't understand this?
American-wanna-be-a-Taliban in New York Times Square, luckily, failed. How much involvement or training he actually got is anyone's guess. Again, and luckily, it wasn't much.
And the exposure of exactly how weak the Patriot Act, the NSA, the CIA, the FBI and all the other so-called leaders we have... apparently their best weapon is Luck. That's not good enough to stop the next one, but for now, it's all we got. Oh, and two heroes, one an Immigrant who LOVES his new home who called it in.
See you next week, folks.

Mar 10, 2010

Police Fill Budget Hole, er, Saftey Record

Virginia State Police Help With Budget Crunch, er Safety Record... yeah, Safety that's the Ticket!

A regularly scheduled Virginia ticketing blitz has generated 120,977 traffic citations since 2006.

Virginia State PoliceA story that comes to us from our friends at TheNewspaper.com, should come as absolutely no surprise to the regular readers of Blasphemes. Yes, there's a budget shortfall in Virginia. Yes, the State Police are leaned on - nay, ordered - to fill the State coffers with ticky-tack moving violations in an attempt to further bleed their citizenry. Should Virginia drivers be more careful? Yes, especially knowing that their State Police are nothing more than a profit center for their State Capital. Bonus, there's Federal money mingled in with this story. The federally funded ticketing blitz in the state of Virginia landed a total of 6996 traffic tickets last weekend. The blitz, dubbed "Operation Air, Land and Speed" coincided with frantic efforts by state officials to close a$2.2 billion budget deficit. Supervisors ordered state troopers to saturate Interstates 81 and 95 to issue as many tickets as humanly possible over the space of two days. [All emphasis added by Cap'n]

"The safety of Virginia's highways begins the minute a vehicle is put in 'drive,'" Virginia State Police Superintendent W. Steven Flaherty said in a statement. "Those split second decisions to choose not to drive drunk, to choose to wear a seat belt and to choose not to speed or drive aggressively really do make a difference in preventing and/or surviving a crash." Funny, he didn't mention crazy deficit spending by the Statehouse?

Officers had no trouble delivering the requested number of speeding tickets with a total of 3536 ordinary speeding citations written. In addition, another 717 "reckless driving" tickets were filed, although these most often are simple speeding tickets that happen to carry a fine of up to $2500. Driving as little as 10 to 15 MPH over the limit can qualify for this enhanced punishment. On the other end of the scale, some 310 tickets were handed to drivers who either forgot to wear their seatbelts or made a choice not to do so.

Activists with the National Motorists Association pointed out that enforcement efforts may have concentrated on areas where speed limits are expected to rise to 70 MPH following Governor Bob McDonnell's signature on legislation raising the state's maximum speed limit (view law). This would mean a significant number of tickets were issued for conduct that will be perfectly legal in a matter of months. The group also indicated that state police tactics may run afoul of state law.

"All officers making arrests incident to the enforcement of this title shall be paid fixed salaries for their services and shall have no interest in, nor be permitted by law to accept the benefit of, any fine or fee resulting from the arrest or conviction of an offender against any provision of this title," Virginia Code Section 46.2-102 states.

Under the federal grant application process, state officials explained that they would pay officers overtime -- at least one-and-a-half times their normal salary -- to participate. This special reward for ticketing operation participants appears to violate the spirit of state law.

Since 2006, a total of twenty-three ticketing blitzes have taken place, generating 120,977 traffic tickets.

Thus helping to close the wound of overspending.

Note to our readers, if you plan on going anywhere near Virginia, wear your seat belt - and please slow down - they're counting on you to pay their bills.

Jan 28, 2010

Bi Polar SOTU

A large number of Americans are sick of the unchecked growth of the Federal Government. I'm also not happy about the raising of all my other tax liabilities. My property tax is way up, the State income tax is going up, even my water bill is up 20 bucks from my last water bill. And I've been using less government services - and less water. I, like many others on my block, want fewer government services and less government interference in our social and economic lives.

Just to be clear, I'm not trying to be an obstructionist Republi-can't who mearly stands in the way as their only political option [no matter how well that actually works]. Nor am I influenced by 'Astro-Turffed' special interests who are trying to push particular agendas around the obstructionist party faithful.

No, I'm speaking to the bi-polar country, and the bi-polar State of the Union speech I heard last night. President Obama, on one hand, recognized how America is tired of the same old crap out of Washington. And while Mr. Obama was making little digs at the Republicans...

"Saying "no" to everything is not leadership."

...just as he was telling everyone how upset everyone was at the playground crap in Washington. Bi-polar for sure. on the other, tasked his party to grow the size of government interference and also [somehow] create jobs.

Let me be clear - the government doesn't make jobs! If you don't understand this - please write me a comment or just keep reading.

But why am I not excited about the President's plan? Because all his other plans were no good, that's why. Take the $787 billion stimulus package. Fifty-six percent of Americans now oppose the stimulus, with only 42 percent supporting it. A year ago, those numbers were reversed. The American people have learned what economists such as Robert Barro and Valerie Ramey could have told you a long time ago: that a dollar increase in government spending results in no more (and almost certainly less) than a dollar increase in economic activity. The Administration's estimates about how many jobs would be "created" by the stimulus package—a term of art later modified to "saved or created," then downgraded further to "funded"—have been slippery, unconvincing, and wildly off-base. The same goes for their estimates on the unemployment rate, still in double digits and not improving despite confident predictions that the stimulus would cap the bleeding at 9 percent. And then there's a report that construction jobs don't stimulate anything.

And then there were the bailouts. Bush and now Mr. Obama have taken from the people of 'Main Street' and given it to their buddies in 'Wall Street'. For some reason, I'm a little bitter about that. There's been no accounting of what happened to the money - but everytime I see a golden parachute deploy or if I hear of a bonus that's more than I brought in last decade -- yeah, I get a little bitter about that. And I'm also aware that every dollar spent is leveraged on our future. You're taking money from the current and future economy. You're merely postponing a larger crash...

The President's spending priorities are less than compelling. He campaigned on a promise to enact a "net spending cut" in federal outlays. Yes, that's a good reaction to the free-spending days of George Bush, to be sure. But then why has overall federal spending in fiscal year 2009 increased 32 percent over the previous year? And that's not counting our ongoing wars.

Tack onto all this the slow-motion car wreck that was health care "reform" (His word, not mine). He discussed the need to contain costs and introduce choice and competition into the system. Forget tort reform, or single payers -- if the Health Care Reform just simply broke the link between employment and insurance, so that individuals can shop for and own their own policies regardless of their work situation, or State they live in - you'd see some fantastic Change!

I won't even bring up the broken promises and dashed hopes on closing Guantanamo, reversing discrimination against gays, and paring back our overseas military commitments, but the headline story of your presidency is about one crucial thing: economic policy and results.

If the President has any chance of winning back the shinny glow that got him elected, he would start by taking those promises seriously, rather than treating them as short-term fixes for long-term drops in popularity. Stop campaigning, start governing. Take the American people seriously. Acknowledge that differences of opinion spring from genuine place. [With the exception of the lady wearing the homemade airbrushed Sarah Palin T-Shirt.] And try something that no president since Bill Clinton has even attempted: Scale back ambitions. Pay as you go. Limit the growth of government. You know, just like the rest of us!

Prosperity isn't something the government creates, it's something the government can enable, by establishing a set of simple rules and getting the hell out of the way.

Nov 8, 2009

Sunday Comics

Here's the review of the rest of week, and also some crap I didn't get to - like the crazy jobs data that came down the pipe. Also the NY Yankee$ won the World $erie$. Great work Joe G.

First off there were some elections... that didn't matter. Right. No really - I mean things are turning to the right.

Jobs Data: 10.2% unemployment. But the Stimulus is working.... Uh, right?
The Maroon dots are 'actual' unemployment data reported, and the blue lines were created by the Obama economic team. Also, prior to Mr. Obama becoming President, it was always added that there are countless people who aren't counted because they've given up hope and have stopped looking for work. So, take that into account, if you want.
And helped save or create 650,000 jobs...
How do you track a 'saved job' anyway? What kind of magical spreadsheet is that on?

And my favorite one from the Week that Was...

Oct 13, 2009

1976 Electoral Map

Food for thought...


"In the United States, the political system is a very marginal affair. There are two parties, so-called, but they're really factions of the same party, the Business Party. Both represent some range of business interests. In fact, they can change their positions 180 degrees, and nobody even notices. In the 1984 election, for example, there was actually an issue, which often there isn't. The issue was Keynesian growth versus fiscal conservatism. The Republicans were the party of Keynesian growth: big spending, deficits, and so on. The Democrats were the party of fiscal conservatism: watch the money supply, worry about the deficits, et cetera. Now, I didn't see a single comment pointing out that the two parties had completely reversed their traditional positions. Traditionally, the Democrats are the party of Keynesian growth, and the Republicans the party of fiscal conservatism. So doesn't it strike you that something must have happened? Well, actually, it makes sense. Both parties are essentially the same party. The only question is how coalitions of investors have shifted around on tactical issues now and then. As they do, the parties shift to opposite positions, within a narrow spectrum."
- Noam Chomsky, 1990.

Jul 31, 2009

Clunkers

The White House Says 'Clunkers' Rebate Plan Will Go On

The White House said Friday that the "cash for clunkers" program was still alive even though the $1 billion that
Congress had appropriated for it has already been snapped up. Read More:

Cash For Clunkers was doomed just like Oprah's KFC free chicken. It was a pile of paperwork and ever-changing rules. There was only $1 Billion put in the plan. So, at a max of $4000, that's oh, let's pretend about 12 per dealership nationwide.

My guess there were over 100 people banging on the dealership glass window lookin' for theirs.

Okay, let me get my score card out here...

Bail Out - fail
North Korea - fail
Iran ending their nuclear ambitions - fail
Cash for Clunkers - fail
Government Health Care ... oh, hold on! That'll be a win!

What the hell, folks? What HAS worked from this gang of Idiots in Congress and the Obama Administration?

Can anyone give me a Win here?

Apr 5, 2009

Todd Explains Taxes

The subject was ever-increasing cigarette taxes, and the guest on WGN-AM 720 Wednesday morning was Cook County Board President Todd Stroger.

Host John Williams asked: Isn't it unfair to keep targeting smokers with tax increases?
"That is the American way," Stroger replied. "And the way that it's generally done is, you find some group that's small enough where they can't beat you up, and you tax them and you tell everybody else, 'See? We didn't tax you.' "
See?! And who's he coming for next? My guess? It'll be you folks getting drive-thru cheeseburgers.

If that's not enough, another serious threat facing the Cook County taxpayer: Todd is now gouging you for a $400 million-a-year windfall from its unneeded sales tax hike and also wants to increase your debt by more than a quarter-billion dollars.

As Bob from Cook County writes,
"What everyone has known all along; politicians at all levels in Illinois have a license to steal. No other county in America has a budget director as incompetent as Stroger's cousin. No other county in America employs as many dead beats as Cook County. No other county in America pays their budget director more than a doctor makes.

In most states the legislature would step in and threaten to cut off funding until the mess is fixed. Here? The speaker of the house would never do that given he needs the 8th ward vote to make his daughter senator or governor.

We are the next Detroit if this doesnt stop."
I completely agree with you "Bob." Last one out, please shut off the lights. Or, you could try this gathering I heard about. Be sure to gesture loudly expecting to make a stand on the issue.... (unlikely, but you'll feel like you did something for about 3 hours afterward.)

Apr 2, 2009

Government Overseer

Just days after GM's CEO Rick Wagoner was forced out by the Obama administration, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner left open the possibility that such moves could happen again.

Geithner acknowledged the government has had to do "exceptional things" – citing AIG as well as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

"We have changed management aboard," he said. "And where we've done that, we've done it because we thought that was necessary to make sure these institutions emerge stronger in the future."

When asked if he would leave open the option to pressure a bank CEO to resign, Geithner replied: "Of course."
---
Mr. Geithner, will you also be taxing Mr. Emmanuel 90% on the bonuses he received for his month of work at Fannie Mae? What about the Congress and the bonuses they got?

When will you start applying that same pressure to Congress? Will you pressure Barney Frank or Chris Dodd to leave after managing our government poorly, creating massive deficits, and nearly reducing our treasury bonds to junk status? How many of GM's, AIG, or the housing bubble problems were caused because of government intervention/legislation?

And when does President Obama or Tim Geithner ask the president of the UAW to resign as well? If you're going to meddle with GM's business, why not make it fair and equitable as well? I already know the answer to that question - but when the UAW continues to fight changes, and GM is forced into bankruptcy protection, labor will be (eh, it should be) the first to lose. Labor simply has no collateral to stand on in bankruptcy court. Perhaps they're assuming that the Union dues payers aren't aware of their lack of a barganing position? Hey, call up a retired United Airline Pilot's Union member how bankruptcy helped their pensions. Oh, right - the goverment had to bail them out.

What's confusing for me is that I thought Mr. Obama ran for President so that he would fix the problems in the government? You know, that big nasty evil George Bush? He asked for that job. He got elected for that job. So after 65 days, why does Mr. Obama spend his time meddling with private business?

Why did he demand GM to cut 11/22 profitable car models from production? Should Mr. Wagoner have resigned or been asked to step down? It should have come from the shareholders, to whom he is accountable, not from the President of the United States or the government. Even after accepting the government loan guarantees - the government stepped over the line. They're re-writing the rules that they don't know how to play. The bail out looks like Calvinball.

Now, by stirred up populist demand, there are CEO's that took bail out money working for $1 A year. Don't you think that the President, and the Congress should also be willing to lead by such an elevated example and standard to do their jobs for $1 a year too? And in an act of solidaridy with their constituants, also do their jobs with no benefits? No. More likely, Congress'll probably just vote themselves another pay increase. Again.

It isn't too late to work on making government leaner, meaner and greener before attacking and criticizing private business. What if he started by holding government accountable to the taxpayers, first? There's a big, deep hole. That hole has been there for 40 years. The job is not to dig a deeper hole, but to get out of that hole! Think of the political gain? They'd be able to shut down the Republicans AND shut Rush Limbaugh up at the same time! Huzzah!

There was a brief moment where Mr. Obama could have ended the hypocrisy and double standards in government. Talk about a missed opportunity. If only he had cleaned his house first, before worrying about the mess in mine or my neighbor's. Lead first, set an example, the rest of us will follow with the Changes.

Mar 31, 2009

Chicago Tax Revolt

It has begun.
“After more than 20 years here I’m done, just done. Our condo is for sale and when it does, we’re outta here. In one last act of defiance, my wife is going to drive our car and intentionally get a red light ticket with photo/video - we’ll have the plates disguised. When the video/photo is viewed, they’ll see my bare ass pressed against the back window accompanied a couple middle fingers. We’ll then drive out of town for the last time.” - Chicago Tom
When I lived on Clark and Belmont, there was a spot on Clark Street that had no parking meter. It had been ripped off or something. That was the aptly named “coveted spot.” When I was able to get that spot, usually on a Sunday morning at 6:00 AM, I’d find any way to not move that car. I'd walk more, turn down work, whatever it took to keep that spot. It was the proverbial “Free Parking” spot on the Monopoly board that is the City of Chicago. That was in 1996. It's gotten a whole lot worse.

Today, my friends in Chicago are faced with an increasing burden to fill the coffers of a perpetual budget shortfall. The tax burden is taking Chicago from a remarkably fun and livable city into a hostile battleground for wallets.

  • Between the unjustified 10.25% County Sales Tax - which is the highest in the country.
  • The privitization of parking meters - where the fines and fees were in place before the infrastructure to accommodate those changes.
  • There's a proliferation of Robo-Camera-Cops who's aim went from red light runners to insurance checks to speeder cams in the course of a half a week.
  • The streets are a sea of unfilled holes - a result of scaled back snow removal, unless, that street will be on the path of a visiting Olympic Official. Of course.
  • All in a State that is increasing income taxes and fees faster than they railroaded Rod out of office.
Why? Well somebody has to pay for all the cousins and cronies running the city, right? Clout, graft and corruption doesn't pay for itself you know? Hey, Just last week Streets and Sanitation chief Al Sanchez was found guilty of four of seven counts of mail fraud, having been accused of reinventing hiring rules to reward political allies.

There's a swell of backlash that's building.

It's not "vote with your feet" which, since the housing situation, has been harder to accomplish. Vote with your feet has been the historic American response.

This backlash is more violent this time. And it's only just begun.

By handing over municipal parking meters to a private company, the City of Chicago has given its citizens a colossal case of sticker shock. The cost of most meters will quadruple by 2013.

By playing by the rules, a driver in Chicago who inserts a quarter to their meter will find that it now only buys seven minutes. A single meter might require 28 quarters to park for two hours. (Sun Times). That meter might have been a single quarter for an hour a week or two ago.

In the deal, Pharaoh Mayor Daley II rammed through his pliable City Council in 48 hours allows the foreign company, LAZ Parking, to keep all revenue from the meters while the city keeps all cash from parking tickets when meters expire.

Parking tickets reap six, seven, even eight times more than what meters bring in. But - what if people start refusing to park at meters, or boycott them, how will they get ticketed? And how can the city hope to rake in that revenue?

And what about those folks who are forced to park at meters? At first, it seemed just random or coincidence when a broken meter was spotted. There’s no big surprise in finding a broken meter in Chicago–they’re everywhere, just like when I lived in the city.

But the number of broken meters seem to be increasing. Websites and Facebook updates are littered with folks advocating everything from a simple boycott, to using pennies or nickels to fill up the meters to capacity and render them inoperable–at least temporarily.

But then it shifted. That's when it went into another direction.

Spray paint.

An entire block of parking meters, numbering nearly 20, were spotted along west Irving Park in the Albany Park neighborhood, that had both the front and back of their heads spray painted black. Once spray painted, these meters are unreadable by Parking Enforcement Aides and therefore, vehicles can’t be ticketed as it’s impossible to see if the meters were fed or not.


Defacing, or Decal Removal

LAZ Parking’s new decals have been removed in a concerted effort along Lincoln Ave. and other streets in the Lakeview neighborhood, leaving long stretches of meters without any instructions on how and when to feed the meters. This leaves the meter without the proper information required by law to be an operational parking meter. A motorist could easily contest any expired meter ticket on these meters because it doesn’t exhibit the proper information.
“In some cases, these decals just peel right off the front of the meter with little or no effort. When these stickers were originally applied, the weather was very cold and it seems the adhesive didn’t adhere correctly. These stickers just come right off. They also appear to be too big to fit into the recessed area they are being placed in. Yet another case of someone in charge not knowing what they are doing.” - Brian
Super glue, Meters broken or damaged, overfed with pennies

One individual calling his or her self “Illinois Patriot,” is calling for direct vandalism attacks to disable parking meters.

“WE, the people, need to start fighting back! Here are some ideas to fight back:,” states Illinois Patriot in a communique to The Expired Meter.com. “A good shot of expanding foam should feed the meter’s coin slot nicely. Don’t get caught… Epoxy putties and VHB sided foam tapes show additional promise for field expedient mayhem and merriment.”

Now, we at Blasphemes NEVER condone the destruction of property or vandalisim. However, we seem to have not the beginning of a boycott... it looks more like the beginning of - dare I say -

ALL OUT REBELLION!

Rock on.

Hey, wasn't someone in Chicago talking about a tea party the other day?

Mar 25, 2009

Dear AIG - I Quit!

The following is a letter sent on Tuesday by Jake DeSantis, an executive vice president of the American International Group’s financial products unit, to Edward M. Liddy, the chief executive of A.I.G.

DEAR Mr. Liddy,

It is with deep regret that I submit my notice of resignation from A.I.G. Financial Products. I hope you take the time to read this entire letter. Before describing the details of my decision, I want to offer some context:

I am proud of everything I have done for the commodity and equity divisions of A.I.G.-F.P. I was in no way involved in — or responsible for — the credit default swap transactions that have hamstrung A.I.G. Nor were more than a handful of the 400 current employees of A.I.G.-F.P. Most of those responsible have left the company and have conspicuously escaped the public outrage.

After 12 months of hard work dismantling the company — during which A.I.G. reassured us many times we would be rewarded in March 2009 — we in the financial products unit have been betrayed by A.I.G. and are being unfairly persecuted by elected officials. In response to this, I will now leave the company and donate my entire post-tax retention payment to those suffering from the global economic downturn. My intent is to keep none of the money myself.

I take this action after 11 years of dedicated, honorable service to A.I.G. I can no longer effectively perform my duties in this dysfunctional environment, nor am I being paid to do so. Like you, I was asked to work for an annual salary of $1, and I agreed out of a sense of duty to the company and to the public officials who have come to its aid. Having now been let down by both, I can no longer justify spending 10, 12, 14 hours a day away from my family for the benefit of those who have let me down.

You and I have never met or spoken to each other, so I’d like to tell you about myself. I was raised by schoolteachers working multiple jobs in a world of closing steel mills. My hard work earned me acceptance to M.I.T., and the institute’s generous financial aid enabled me to attend. I had fulfilled my American dream.

I started at this company in 1998 as an equity trader, became the head of equity and commodity trading and, a couple of years before A.I.G.’s meltdown last September, was named the head of business development for commodities. Over this period the equity and commodity units were consistently profitable — in most years generating net profits of well over $100 million. Most recently, during the dismantling of A.I.G.-F.P., I was an integral player in the pending sale of its well-regarded commodity index business to UBS. As you know, business unit sales like this are crucial to A.I.G.’s effort to repay the American taxpayer.

The profitability of the businesses with which I was associated clearly supported my compensation. I never received any pay resulting from the credit default swaps that are now losing so much money. I did, however, like many others here, lose a significant portion of my life savings in the form of deferred compensation invested in the capital of A.I.G.-F.P. because of those losses. In this way I have personally suffered from this controversial activity — directly as well as indirectly with the rest of the taxpayers.

I have the utmost respect for the civic duty that you are now performing at A.I.G. You are as blameless for these credit default swap losses as I am. You answered your country’s call and you are taking a tremendous beating for it.

But you also are aware that most of the employees of your financial products unit had nothing to do with the large losses. And I am disappointed and frustrated over your lack of support for us. I and many others in the unit feel betrayed that you failed to stand up for us in the face of untrue and unfair accusations from certain members of Congress last Wednesday and from the press over our retention payments, and that you didn’t defend us against the baseless and reckless comments made by the attorneys general of New York and Connecticut.

My guess is that in October, when you learned of these retention contracts, you realized that the employees of the financial products unit needed some incentive to stay and that the contracts, being both ethical and useful, should be left to stand. That’s probably why A.I.G. management assured us on three occasions during that month that the company would “live up to its commitment” to honor the contract guarantees.

That may be why you decided to accelerate by three months more than a quarter of the amounts due under the contracts. That action signified to us your support, and was hardly something that one would do if he truly found the contracts “distasteful.”

That may also be why you authorized the balance of the payments on March 13.

At no time during the past six months that you have been leading A.I.G. did you ask us to revise, renegotiate or break these contracts — until several hours before your appearance last week before Congress.

I think your initial decision to honor the contracts was both ethical and financially astute, but it seems to have been politically unwise. It’s now apparent that you either misunderstood the agreements that you had made — tacit or otherwise — with the Federal Reserve, the Treasury, various members of Congress and Attorney General Andrew Cuomo of New York, or were not strong enough to withstand the shifting political winds.

You’ve now asked the current employees of A.I.G.-F.P. to repay these earnings. As you can imagine, there has been a tremendous amount of serious thought and heated discussion about how we should respond to this breach of trust.

As most of us have done nothing wrong, guilt is not a motivation to surrender our earnings. We have worked 12 long months under these contracts and now deserve to be paid as promised. None of us should be cheated of our payments any more than a plumber should be cheated after he has fixed the pipes but a careless electrician causes a fire that burns down the house.

Many of the employees have, in the past six months, turned down job offers from more stable employers, based on A.I.G.’s assurances that the contracts would be honored. They are now angry about having been misled by A.I.G.’s promises and are not inclined to return the money as a favor to you.

The only real motivation that anyone at A.I.G.-F.P. now has is fear. Mr. Cuomo has threatened to “name and shame,” and his counterpart in Connecticut, Richard Blumenthal, has made similar threats — even though attorneys general are supposed to stand for due process, to conduct trials in courts and not the press.

So what am I to do? There’s no easy answer. I know that because of hard work I have benefited more than most during the economic boom and have saved enough that my family is unlikely to suffer devastating losses during the current bust. Some might argue that members of my profession have been overpaid, and I wouldn’t disagree.

That is why I have decided to donate 100 percent of the effective after-tax proceeds of my retention payment directly to organizations that are helping people who are suffering from the global downturn. This is not a tax-deduction gimmick; I simply believe that I at least deserve to dictate how my earnings are spent, and do not want to see them disappear back into the obscurity of A.I.G.’s or the federal government’s budget. Our earnings have caused such a distraction for so many from the more pressing issues our country faces, and I would like to see my share of it benefit those truly in need.

On March 16 I received a payment from A.I.G. amounting to $742,006.40, after taxes. In light of the uncertainty over the ultimate taxation and legal status of this payment, the actual amount I donate may be less — in fact, it may end up being far less if the recent House bill raising the tax on the retention payments to 90 percent stands. Once all the money is donated, you will immediately receive a list of all recipients.

This choice is right for me. I wish others at A.I.G.-F.P. luck finding peace with their difficult decision, and only hope their judgment is not clouded by fear.

Mr. Liddy, I wish you success in your commitment to return the money extended by the American government, and luck with the continued unwinding of the company’s diverse businesses — especially those remaining credit default swaps. I’ll continue over the short term to help make sure no balls are dropped, but after what’s happened this past week I can’t remain much longer — there is too much bad blood. I’m not sure how you will greet my resignation, but at least Attorney General Blumenthal should be relieved that I’ll leave under my own power and will not need to be “shoved out the door.”

Sincerely,
Jake DeSantis

Mar 24, 2009

Outsourcing Cops

A reader has sent in an article for me to share with everyone:
Dear Cappy, 
Chicago wants to out-source some of its police to a private contractor. Yeah, Blackwater did such a bang up job in Iraq too.
How could Chicago outsourcing it's police force be a bad idea? I mean, what could POSSIBLY go wrong?

On the best of days, a private security or Mall-Cop, or Rent-a-Cop has far less training than a member of the Fraternal Order of Police, which means they're dangerously under prepared to preserve and protect - and their jobs aren't to protect the public, so there's potential to push their perceived authority too far. On the worst of days, their lives and the lives of others are more likely to be in danger.

Oh, and to boot, the firm under consideration? Yeah, they're foreigners. That's right, a Canadian firm is being outfitted as the "Special Patrol" which cruises the commercial strips of lower South Michigan Ave.

Hold on a second! A Canadian private security guy? Isn't that John Candy in Armed and Dangerous?
Now the idea isn't that they don't replace Chicago's Finest, its' that they perform minutia that the Chicago Cops don't do - like moving violations and handing out citations for loitering.
That's all fine and good until, well, you know, an illegal handgun is drawn? (You'll note that handguns are illegal in the city of Chicago)
The J. Carolina Hosiery store, for example, was robbed 14 times in the last year. 

"The stores are being robbed, and then they're getting extorted, and you have the little gangbangers running in and out of stores trying to rob people," said store supervisor Larry McCullough. 

Since the private security patrols arrived, the robberies have continued, "but it's slowing down, because it seems like more of the stores have to have their own guns and their own security." 
Let me get this straight, the crime has gone down because the store owners are packing illegal heat? So what do we need a bunch of expensive Mounties-for-rent trollin' the South Side? Why not go the other end of the extreme, and just hire Blackwater to take on crime on the South Side. Or go totally nuts and let a corporation just run the city, like OCP in Robocop? An ED-209 would surly end that little graffiti problem lickity split.

Am I nuts? Sure, I am... what're your thoughts on this?

Mar 15, 2009

Barack, Beijing and Joe Pesci

If you owe a little money and can't pay it back, you're going to get a beating. If you owe a lot of money, you might lose a thumb. Now, let's assume you're about to lose a thumb, and you look up at Joe Pesci and tell him you need more?

That's the US, and Joe Pesci is China.
So far Joe has given us trillions. Now we're asking for more. This has been going on for a while, but for the first time, the Chinese are worried:

Chinese Premier "Boss" Wen Jiabao had said Friday he was "concerned" about the safety of the estimated $1 trillion his country has invested in U.S. government debt. China is Washington's biggest foreign creditor, and Obama's administration is counting on the Chinese to help pay for the $787 billion economic stimulus package by buying U.S. bonds.

"Of course we are concerned about the safety of our assets. To be honest, I'm a little bit worried," Wen said. "I would like to call on the United States to honor its words, stay a credible nation and ensure the safety of Chinese assets."

President Obama immediately rushed to assure the Chinese that their investment in America is safe:

"There's a reason why even in the midst of this economic crisis you've seen actual increases in investment flows here into the United States," Obama said. "I think it's a recognition that the stability not only of our economic system, but also our political system, is extraordinary.

"I think that not just the Chinese government, but every investor, can have absolute confidence in the soundness of investments in the United States," he added.

Joe Pesci isn't worried about the US defaulting on its bonds. That won't happen. But Joe Pesci wonders outloud that the U.S. will adopt the standard debtor's remedy of inflating its currency and paying back its debts in shrunken dollars. Why would Joe Pesci be worried about this? Because Obama's budget proposes to borrow trillions of dollars, injecting them into the U.S. economy without any offsetting wealth being created. The inevitable result, as any economist not in the pay of the Obama administration or the Democratic Party will tell you, is inflation.

Some experts say that the Chinese are stuck, like the loan shark to whom you owe a lot of money you can't pay. Therefore, they shouldn't talk down the dollar lest they further devalue the trillion dollars' worth they already own:

The dollars they get back (eventually) will be worth LESS than what they loaned.

In questioning the U.S. ability to make good on its debts, China threatens to undermine the value of the very assets it's holding. Like beating the crap out of someone before they make a PowerPoint presentation. Not too good for everyone's business.

Meanwhile, Barack Obama's budget contemplates that over the next five years, the federal government will borrow more money--run up more debt--than has been incurred during the entire history of the Republic, from George Washington to George Bush. It's easy to draw up a budget that contemplates debt if you're confident that someone is willing to lend you the money. In reality, though, the only plausible creditor is... the Chinese.

With Joe swinging his bat around, he has told Obama that he's willing to lend our government more money only if 1) the Obama administration follows a more responsible fiscal policy, and 2) in any event, they will insist on higher interest rates in the future to compensate themselves for the risk of inflation. I assume Obama will have to go along, since there seems no prospect of a Plan B.

Bottom Line: American conservatives may well be in the position of hoping the "Communist" Chinese can impose fiscal discipline on our shamefully incompetent government.