Thursday, March 31, 2011
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
IS ADVOCATING FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE BEHAVIOR FOR AMERICA REALLY EXTREMISM?
“Republicans’ decisions to abandon the three-week proposal negotiated by their own party’s leadership suggests that Tea Party lawmakers are unwilling to accept anything short of the extreme cuts in the House budget, even if it risks a shutdown. This is a bad omen that shows how difficult it will be for Speaker Boehner to bring the Tea Party along for any long-term compromise.”
--U.S. Senator Charles Schumer
Schumer's view may appeal to the "Liberal Elite", the "X generation" and the "victim culture"; however, it flies in the face of the emerging neoliberal philosophy which defines the Tea Party movement and is gaining significant momentum within the Millennium generation (the young folks who will ultimately be saddled with this ever mounting reckless National debt).
Neoliberalism supports a fiscal policy which precludes governments from running large deficits that have to be paid back by future citizens. They believe that constant deficits will lead to higher inflation and lower productivity, and therefore must be avoided.
Neoliberalists emphasize the efficiency of the private sector and the promotion of free trade in determining the political and economic priorities of the state. The premise being that when America's economic driving force is transferred from the public to the private sector; our government will become more efficient and the economic health of our nation will be restored.
John Williamson's, "Washington Consensus", provides a ten (10) point list of Neoliberal policy proposals which has garnered support from Washington-based international economic organizations such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank:
1. "Fiscal policy Governments should not run large deficits that have to be paid back by future citizens, and such deficits can only have a short term effect on the level of employment in the economy. Constant deficits will lead to higher inflation and lower productivity, and should be avoided. Deficits should only be used for occasional stabilization purposes;"
2. "Redirection of public spending from subsidies (especially what neoliberals call "indiscriminate subsidies") and other spending neoliberals deem wasteful toward broad-based provision of key pro-growth, pro-poor services like primary education, primary health care and infrastructure investment--with the common sense caveat that responsible behavior is not only encouraged but rewarded and irresponsible behavior is met with appropriate consequences;"
3. "Tax reform– broadening the tax base and adopting moderate marginal tax rates to encourage innovation and efficiency;"
4. "Interest rates that are market determined and positive (but moderate) in real terms;"
5. "Floating exchange rates;"
6. "Trade liberalization – liberalization of imports, with particular emphasis on elimination of quantitative restrictions (licensing, etc.); any trade protection to be provided by law and relatively uniform tariffs; thus encouraging competition and long term growth;"
7."Liberalization of the "capital account" of the balance of payments, that is, allowing people the opportunity to invest funds overseas and allowing foreign funds to be invested in the home country with parity;"
8."Privatization of state enterprises; Promoting market provision of goods and services which the government cannot provide as effectively or efficiently, such as telecommunications, where having many service providers promotes choice and competition;"
9."Deregulation – abolition of regulations that impede market entry or restrict competition, except for those justified on safety, environmental and consumer protection grounds, and prudent oversight of financial institutions;"
10. "Legal security for property rights and financialisation of capital that preclude politically correct government mandates which led to the housing crisis/meltdown".
Even Chicago University's School of Economics in Obama's quasi-hometown, emphasizes non-intervention from government and rejects regulation in laissez-faire free markets as inefficient.
The school rejects Keynesianism in favor of rational expectations and has impacted the field of finance by the development of the efficient market hypothesis which stresses "positive economics"– that is, empirically based studies using statistics to prove theory.
NOTE: The University of Chicago economic department is widely considered one of the world’s foremost economics departments and has fielded more Nobel Prize winners (Obama's Nobel desecration notwithstanding) and John Bates Clark medalists in economics than any other university.
So, Senator Schumer, should we simply deplete the blood bank while ignoring the arterial bleed; or is it FINALLY time to apply a tourniquet and stop the bleeding?
If we, as a people, persist in confusing a lynching with the proper application of a tournaquet; America will indeed be hung to her death..................and in very short order.
--U.S. Senator Charles Schumer
Schumer's view may appeal to the "Liberal Elite", the "X generation" and the "victim culture"; however, it flies in the face of the emerging neoliberal philosophy which defines the Tea Party movement and is gaining significant momentum within the Millennium generation (the young folks who will ultimately be saddled with this ever mounting reckless National debt).
Neoliberalism supports a fiscal policy which precludes governments from running large deficits that have to be paid back by future citizens. They believe that constant deficits will lead to higher inflation and lower productivity, and therefore must be avoided.
Neoliberalists emphasize the efficiency of the private sector and the promotion of free trade in determining the political and economic priorities of the state. The premise being that when America's economic driving force is transferred from the public to the private sector; our government will become more efficient and the economic health of our nation will be restored.
John Williamson's, "Washington Consensus", provides a ten (10) point list of Neoliberal policy proposals which has garnered support from Washington-based international economic organizations such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank:
1. "Fiscal policy Governments should not run large deficits that have to be paid back by future citizens, and such deficits can only have a short term effect on the level of employment in the economy. Constant deficits will lead to higher inflation and lower productivity, and should be avoided. Deficits should only be used for occasional stabilization purposes;"
2. "Redirection of public spending from subsidies (especially what neoliberals call "indiscriminate subsidies") and other spending neoliberals deem wasteful toward broad-based provision of key pro-growth, pro-poor services like primary education, primary health care and infrastructure investment--with the common sense caveat that responsible behavior is not only encouraged but rewarded and irresponsible behavior is met with appropriate consequences;"
3. "Tax reform– broadening the tax base and adopting moderate marginal tax rates to encourage innovation and efficiency;"
4. "Interest rates that are market determined and positive (but moderate) in real terms;"
5. "Floating exchange rates;"
6. "Trade liberalization – liberalization of imports, with particular emphasis on elimination of quantitative restrictions (licensing, etc.); any trade protection to be provided by law and relatively uniform tariffs; thus encouraging competition and long term growth;"
7."Liberalization of the "capital account" of the balance of payments, that is, allowing people the opportunity to invest funds overseas and allowing foreign funds to be invested in the home country with parity;"
8."Privatization of state enterprises; Promoting market provision of goods and services which the government cannot provide as effectively or efficiently, such as telecommunications, where having many service providers promotes choice and competition;"
9."Deregulation – abolition of regulations that impede market entry or restrict competition, except for those justified on safety, environmental and consumer protection grounds, and prudent oversight of financial institutions;"
10. "Legal security for property rights and financialisation of capital that preclude politically correct government mandates which led to the housing crisis/meltdown".
Even Chicago University's School of Economics in Obama's quasi-hometown, emphasizes non-intervention from government and rejects regulation in laissez-faire free markets as inefficient.
The school rejects Keynesianism in favor of rational expectations and has impacted the field of finance by the development of the efficient market hypothesis which stresses "positive economics"– that is, empirically based studies using statistics to prove theory.
NOTE: The University of Chicago economic department is widely considered one of the world’s foremost economics departments and has fielded more Nobel Prize winners (Obama's Nobel desecration notwithstanding) and John Bates Clark medalists in economics than any other university.
So, Senator Schumer, should we simply deplete the blood bank while ignoring the arterial bleed; or is it FINALLY time to apply a tourniquet and stop the bleeding?
If we, as a people, persist in confusing a lynching with the proper application of a tournaquet; America will indeed be hung to her death..................and in very short order.
Monday, March 14, 2011
IMPERIAL HONOR..........AMERICA COULD LEARN A LOT FROM JAPAN
Japan suffered the worst earthquake since records have been kept; a devastating 9.0 . Twelve minutes later a tsunami poured over the island. For the next 36 hours aftershocks peppered the landscape.
At least two (2) of Japan's nuclear reactors are at some stage of meltdown.
Almost 200 people are known to have suffered some degree of radiation poisoning.
Tens of thousands are feared dead and the crematoriums are at capacity.
Notwithstanding this horrific disaster, the Japanese response has not only demonstrated a responsible self reliance; but most importantly has shown the world how honorable people react to crisis.
There are no riots.
There is no looting.
There is no blame.
The Japanese people have chosen to work TOGETHER to help each other survive instead of exploiting every angle of self interest.
May God bless the Japanese people and ease their suffering...............may the rest of us learn from their strength of character.
At least two (2) of Japan's nuclear reactors are at some stage of meltdown.
Almost 200 people are known to have suffered some degree of radiation poisoning.
Tens of thousands are feared dead and the crematoriums are at capacity.
Notwithstanding this horrific disaster, the Japanese response has not only demonstrated a responsible self reliance; but most importantly has shown the world how honorable people react to crisis.
There are no riots.
There is no looting.
There is no blame.
The Japanese people have chosen to work TOGETHER to help each other survive instead of exploiting every angle of self interest.
May God bless the Japanese people and ease their suffering...............may the rest of us learn from their strength of character.
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
THE FURY OF DA LYKOS........WILL IT SUBSTITUTE FOR LEADERSHIP?
FOUR (4) young children are dead........home alone and burned alive while their "caretaker", Jessica Tata, was shopping at Target.
FOUR (4) young children were burned alive on Thursday, February 24, 2011, and DA Pat Lykos refused to accept charges until Sunday, February 27, 2011; well after Tata had safely fled to Nigeria.
FOUR (4) attempts were made by arson investigators to the DA's office BEFORE charges were accepted.
FOUR (4) days were needed for the DA's office to act.
Lykos insists there was simply not enough evidence to accept charges until the fourth day of the investigation.
Specifically, Lykos wanted to make sure there were no other adults anywhere in the house when it burned along with the four (4) children......never mind that there were no adults at the crime scene filling that description nor reports from ANYONE that ANY adult was in the house at the time of the deadly fire.
It seems odd that a FOUR (4) day search for these phantom adults was required before arresting a known flight risk who was an obvious suspect.
Even if there were negligently entrusted adults in the house when the FOUR (4) children were burned to death; they sure as hell were, at the very least, grossly derelict in their duty of care and would not absolve Tata from criminal liability.
Are ADAs in Harris County today really that afraid to file a high profile case and actually go to trial?
Houston Fire Marshall Richard Galvan is quoted as saying, "This is the first time I've experienced the hoops I had to go through with the DA."
Investigator Ruben Hernandez had the foresight to have a Houston Police Department sergeant listen in to his phone call when he called intake and informed the ADA who answered that a Crime Stopper's tip indicated that Tata was preparing to flee the United States to avoid prosecution.
It is of grave concern that an investigator felt the need for this degree of corroboration when interacting with an ambivalent prosecutor's office.
Tata in fact fled to Nigeria long before Lykos FINALLY accepted charges for her role in the deaths of the four (4) children and Galvan is left puzzled at the DA's ineptness, "I don't know what the last piece of the puzzle was for them to accept the charges."
Lykos' official response is that she is "FURIOUS"............her arrogance has reached a new low!
ASHAMED AND APOLOGETIC would be a more appropriate response.
I wonder if FOUR (4) little Republican white kids were burned alive in River Oaks under the same or substantially similar circumstances whether the DA's response would have been as trepidatious..........
FOUR (4) young children were burned alive on Thursday, February 24, 2011, and DA Pat Lykos refused to accept charges until Sunday, February 27, 2011; well after Tata had safely fled to Nigeria.
FOUR (4) attempts were made by arson investigators to the DA's office BEFORE charges were accepted.
FOUR (4) days were needed for the DA's office to act.
Lykos insists there was simply not enough evidence to accept charges until the fourth day of the investigation.
Specifically, Lykos wanted to make sure there were no other adults anywhere in the house when it burned along with the four (4) children......never mind that there were no adults at the crime scene filling that description nor reports from ANYONE that ANY adult was in the house at the time of the deadly fire.
It seems odd that a FOUR (4) day search for these phantom adults was required before arresting a known flight risk who was an obvious suspect.
Even if there were negligently entrusted adults in the house when the FOUR (4) children were burned to death; they sure as hell were, at the very least, grossly derelict in their duty of care and would not absolve Tata from criminal liability.
Are ADAs in Harris County today really that afraid to file a high profile case and actually go to trial?
Houston Fire Marshall Richard Galvan is quoted as saying, "This is the first time I've experienced the hoops I had to go through with the DA."
Investigator Ruben Hernandez had the foresight to have a Houston Police Department sergeant listen in to his phone call when he called intake and informed the ADA who answered that a Crime Stopper's tip indicated that Tata was preparing to flee the United States to avoid prosecution.
It is of grave concern that an investigator felt the need for this degree of corroboration when interacting with an ambivalent prosecutor's office.
Tata in fact fled to Nigeria long before Lykos FINALLY accepted charges for her role in the deaths of the four (4) children and Galvan is left puzzled at the DA's ineptness, "I don't know what the last piece of the puzzle was for them to accept the charges."
Lykos' official response is that she is "FURIOUS"............her arrogance has reached a new low!
ASHAMED AND APOLOGETIC would be a more appropriate response.
I wonder if FOUR (4) little Republican white kids were burned alive in River Oaks under the same or substantially similar circumstances whether the DA's response would have been as trepidatious..........
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
