Vox Popoli

WND column

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 11:55:00 +0000

History's engine and the great bear wave

I had the good fortune to attend a lecture given by Robert Prechter this weekend. Prechter is the originator of the fascinating neo-science of socionomics, about which I have previously written, and the purpose of his lecture was to update the Elliott Wave interpretations provided in his 2002 book entitled "Conquer the Crash." His fundamental thesis is that the U.S. economy is now several years into a depression that will be an order of magnitude larger than the Great Depression of 1929.

On a related note, a recent report from the Washington Business Journal suggests that my estimate in the column of failed bank deposits running 0.77 percent of total bank deposits this year may be too conservative: The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. is gearing up to handle a large number of bank failures expected as a result of bad mortgages, both in residential and commercial real estate, an economist said Tuesday. “They know they’re going to take down a large number of banks and they can’t do it until they’re staffed up,” said Mark Dotzour, chief economist and director of research for the Real Estate Center at Texas A&M University.

Prechter lecture

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 11:45:00 +0000

Bob Prechter began his lecture with an overview of basic Elliott Wave theory. Five waves in impulse wave, odd waves trend, even waves corrective. Three waves indicate countertrend. He talked about long term trends being very difficult to reverse and noted that Random Walk theory has been completely exploded by pattern recognition and statistical improbability of traders being successful over the long term. The question is no longer if there are patterns in the financial markets, but if the patterns can be described by Elliott Wave theory or not. Deflation, not hyperinflation. Inflationists don't understand impact of debt imploding, they've certainly been wrong thus far.

Just to point out that he hasn't always been bearish, he showed long term history of oil prices from 1859 to 2009. Very good forecasts by Elliott Wave International people from 1993 through 2009 contra those by mainstream forecasters who are obviously doing nothing more than projecting linear trends from the latest turn. Explained why commodity 5th wave blowoffs tend to be bigger and spikier than equity 5th waves. Commodity throwovers tend to cross the long-term channels on both sides. Says we're now facing the biggest bear market in oil since 1915, which is an extraordinarily contrarian position at the moment. Comment - does this suggest we're looking at a new energy source or complete economic collapse? I'd hope the former.

Very interesting section on distinguishing finance from economics. Financial charts show no equilibrium prices; sellers are not supply, not producers. The law of supply and demand doesn't apply. Comment - so freaking obvious in retrospect, can't believe I never saw this. Just look at the damn charts, idiot! Indicates ABC mechanism is irrelevant whether shifting goods dynamic or limits of demand. Have to write footnote for new book, possibly appendix if time. I ask Prechter when he started thinking down these lines as it's not clearly articulated in the books or the EWT, he says around 2003-2004. Paper published in academic journal: The Financial/Economic Dichotomy in Social Behavioral Dynamics: The Socionomic Perspective.

Another question about knowledge of Elliott Waves rendering them useless. Prechter laughs. No shortage of evidence that monetary and fiscal authorities not geniuses capable of ignoring political pressure, let alone mass emotion. Scary symmetry between 1921-1929 and 1974-2000 DJIA charts; look almost identical except latter is 3:1 in time and percentage terms. I was thinking 2x, maybe too conservative. Other indicators include dividend yield, P/E, and bond yield/stock yield ratio. All range 2x to 3x higher than 1929. Could have thrown in relative stimulus packages, credit expansion, and bank failures as percent deposits too.

Seemingly off-base call of 2000 top actually looks quite good in terms of Dow/Gold. Dow/Gold went from 1 in 1980 to 42 (actually 43.7) in 2000. Now down to around 10. Nominal dollar Dow confuses things, surprise surprise, as corrected for inflation Dow would have topped at 847 in 2000, not 14k+. Tends to show that appearance of massive modern wealth is mostly illusory, with the perception upheld by technological advances.

About 20 questions, most technical. I only took notes on those I found interesting:

Q1- what would make him bullish? New Dow high in gold terms to reverse Grand Supercycle call. In other words, not bloody likely.
Q2- Best opportunity approaching appears to be SP500 hitting 1k to 1100. V. nice to ride Wave 3 down, but watch counterparties. One can still lose on a winning bet if the losing bank goes under.
Q3- USD strong when market weak. Should continue to fall as rally continues, then strengthen.
Q4- Social mood is the engine of history. Great book title there. Prechter is clearly well-grounded: "Sometimes they say you're a genius, sometimes they say you're a complete idiot. The truth is somewhere in between." Not interested in trader lifestyle, only did the 1984 trading championship to walk the talk. 440% in four months should more than suffice.
Q5- Tops are diffuse, bottoms tend to be simultaneous. Don't know if that applies to this depression since 1929 tops were simultaneous and bottoms 1931 Japan, 1932 Europe, and 1933 USA.
Q6- When will this rally end? 2nd wave retracements are strong, not enough bulls yet. Should see 95+ before it's over.
Q7- I ask about gold dollar price being less relevant since also insurance against dollar disappearing and value of X/0 being infinite. Prechter answers math, not so much point. (Yes, X/0=0, but analogy not equation.) Leaves impression that he's dubious about dollar replacement, but admits store of value beyond market trading could apply since gold most likely replacement when fiat fails. Doesn't include Dow/Gold chart in monthly updates because traders don't care, that's why they're in the EWT every four months or so.

Excellent lecture, one of the best I've seen. Perhaps a bit more theoretical than some of the traders there were expecting, but Prechter's not afraid to give specifics when asked. Highly recommended, notes don't do justice to the give-and-take during the last hour.

Franken's future

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 17:15:00 +0000

The Fraters Libertas salute a past prediction and request one for the future:

Finally, we should note that way back in May of 2004 one pundit read the tea leaves correctly by noting that the idea of Franken winning a Senate seat in Minnesota was not as far-fetched as it seemed at the time.... Congratulations to Vox Day for not underestimating the unpredictable nature of the Minnesota electorate. Perhaps he could gaze once again into his crystal ball and tell us what he thinks about Franken's reelection chances in... 2014. Sigh. There aren't going to be a lot of laughs over the next five-and-a-half years, are there?

I can only thank the good Fraters, they are too kind. It's true, there won't be many laughs over the course of Franken's term, but it won't be the new senator's fault. In fact, Senator Franken may well provide a small sense of comic relief in much the same way that a chimpanzee dressed in a business suit does. The reality is that Coleman's loss isn't in the least bit harmful. If Minnesota must bear the burden of seeing its interests "represented" in the Senate by a Jew born in New York City, an outright Democrat is to be much preferred to a pseudo-Republican like Coleman.

In any case, Franken will not be re-elected in 2014. The Democratic Party is going to be blamed for the worsening economic contraction and the huge tailwinds that helped him win office will be transformed into even bigger headwinds. To me, the question is not whether the country turns away from the Democratic Party after six years of their hapless rule, but whether a third party will finally begin to gain sufficient electoral strength to offer a convincing alternative Republican Party.

I doubt it. It's highly improbable given the complete failure of the American electorate to recognize the two-party shell game. And yet, it's still more likely than the probability of Obama and his legislative cohorts remaining popular after the failure of the eighth or ninth straight stimulus package. Remember, we're already hearing rumors of the third one now and few even recognize that we're in a depression yet, much less the Great Depression 2.0.

On female journalism

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 10:38:00 +0000

Steve Sailer discovers additional evidence in support of his theory:

As I've mentioned before, a remarkable fraction of female journalistic output, at least the most heartfelt stuff, consists of demands for society to change so that that particular female journalist would be considered hotter looking.

Despite its grammatical infelicity, I rather liked this quote from the comments there: "It is the nature of a liberal to be shocked by the consequences of their own actions." I can't say I encounter much female journalism, though, have to admit, mostly because I don't attempt to keep up on dead celebrities, teen fashions, or television shows.

Note to female writers: writing about your/women's issues in X is still sex-related fluff; it's not equivalent to actually writing about X.

Liberal Fascism - Chapter Four

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 04:45:00 +0000

Next week's reading is Chapter Five. The quiz for it will be posted on Saturday, July 18th.

Don't worry about it

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 19:12:00 +0000

Men, don't call yourselves feminists. You'll regret the consequences.

True, lots of women won’t use the “f-word” because of the negative associations and, arguably, eradicating the “I’m not a feminist, but…” plague among womenfolk is more important than getting the menfolk on board. But for me, personally, if a guy I dated insisted he was not a feminist and refused to identify at all with that label? Well, I’d probably dump him.

This is a hypothetical that really isn't worth worrying about. First, no man with above-average intelligence who isn't a gamma male would ever date a feminist in the first place. Second, and probably more important, no man who is attracted to pretty women is even likely to notice a feminist in the first place. One very seldom finds a feminist who rates so much as a 5/10 on the pretty meter. Needless to say, the writer above is no exception. I'm sure all you non-feminist men are shedding tears and committing emotional seppuku at the thought of being forever off this future cat-collector's list.

If feminists weren't so disturbingly unattractive to men, they wouldn't fall so readily for the equalitarian idiocy in the first place. At least, they would require the usual 12-16 years of propaganda that normal women do to obtain even a modicum of mindless equalitarianism. Think about it. What beautiful woman, who has spent her formative years bearing the brunt of instant hatred from most of the girls and women she encounters, is going to give any credibility whatsoever to the basic concept of equality? Equality doesn't exist in any material, legal, or philosophical sense, and only those who resent the short hand they were dealt see any benefit in propagating the myth.

Assuming alpha

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:34:00 +0000

It's been said that every twenty years, civilization is invaded by a new set of barbarians that require taming. Ironically, a day after posting about the attack of the mad teacher - he was provoked, as some commenters imagined, although hardly in a manner that could justify bashing someone's skull in with a weight - I had my own run-in with a pack of six or seven little bastards at a water slide.

These boys were 13 or so and they were showing no respect for the civilized convention known as "waiting in line". They kept pushing past all the smaller kids and the one or two women in line; when anyone protested one would plaintively claim that they were merely going ahead in order to join his mama. Ha very ha. They did this repeatedly, going up the stone steps and down the slide, until finally they attempted to pass me.

When I told them that there was a line and they could wait like everyone else, the two leaders just smirked and pushed past on either side of me. So, I reached out, grabbed each of them by the back of the neck,and physically placed them behind me on the step below, then turned around and repeated what I'd just said. One of them whined that I should calm down, although I hadn't raised my voice at all, but he ceased his whining when I calmly explained to him that I was perfectly calm and that if, in fact, I was not calm, I would have already thrown him over the nearby fence to the ground a few meters below.

Based on the widened eyes of the two boys, this appeared to have the desired effect. I was just irritated enough with the little bastards that it's possible they may have mistakenly perceived I was looking for an excuse to drop the hammer on them, which was not the case. Interestingly enough, the little pack elected to make that their final trip down the slide and they went off to pursue other activities at the park instead. A small victory for the forces of civilization, perhaps, but a victory nonetheless.

Homeschool or Die

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 18:07:00 +0000

Reason #135: When they're not trying to boff the students, the teachers are trying to kill them:

A science teacher was being questioned by police on suspicion of attempted murder today after a 14-year-old boy was left with serious head injuries after an alleged attack at his school. Peter Harvey, 49, is also being questioned about alleged assaults on two other pupils, believed to be a boy and a girl, also 14.

This also tends to belie the oft-heard, never-proven claim that teaching children science will somehow cause them to ~~magically~~scientifically behave in a more rational manner.

Bad omens from the Baltic

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 11:11:00 +0000

Ambrose Pritchard-Evans is feeling a wee bit less sanguine these days:

Port statistics are revealing. They were a leading indicator before the production collapse in the Japan, Europe, and the US over the winter, and they may be telling us something again. Amrita Sen at Barclays Capital says the number of Baltic Dry ships waiting to berth — mostly in China and Australia — has begun to fall after peaking at 154 in mid-June. The Capesize Iron Ore Port Congestion Index (a new one for me, I must confess) is replicating the pattern seen a year ago just before the commodity boom tipped over.

At 3,100, the Baltic Dry Index is down more than 25 percent from 4,290 on June 3rd. This strikes me as being potentially more significant than all the happy talk and upwardly revised GDP numbers, especially since there's little ability for speculators to bias the index with their expectations.

It strikes me that something just isn't computing. The precipitous falls in shipping and steel production appear to be much greater than a mere 4 percent decline in GDP can possibly balance. I am beginning to get the impression that even if California is reduced to Mexican cannibals dwelling in hemp-built huts, the Bureau of Economic Analysis would report it as a modest decline in GDP with a recovery expected later in the year.

In which I agree with Krugman

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 21:36:00 +0000

Hey, it happens....

When women suffer

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 19:28:00 +0000

Forget the poor guy who just lost his job. The real problem is the terrible pressure to provide for the family this now puts on his working wife!

When she first heard the news, "there was a sinking in the pit of my stomach — and tears," she says. "It was just devastating. It's completely outside your power, and now you're responsible for the entire family," says Janosek, who like many wives who work, brought in roughly one-third of the family's income but is now the principal breadwinner. "You worry about losing everything. It's just overwhelmingly scary — and there are no resources for spouses." Janosek was able to increase her work hours, and her husband now has some contract work, which has helped — but it hardly solves the problem. "I am still angry about it," she says.

Stories like this demonstrate what a complete crock the whole equality charade is. Why in the name of Betty Friedan should anyone feel any sympathy whatsoever for a married woman suddenly being handed the same responsibility borne by most married men throughout the entire history of civilization?

It's rather like the classic joke about The New York Times headline about the world ending: Women and Minorities To Suffer Most.

OECD: Nearing the Bottom

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:55:00 +0000

From the World Economic Outlook: Preliminary Edition

OECD activity now looks to be approaching its nadir, following the deepest decline in post-war history. The ensuing recovery is likely to be both weak and fragile for some time. And the negative economic and social consequences of the crisis will be long-lasting. Yet, it could have been worse. Thanks to a strong economic policy effort an even darker scenario seems to have been avoided.

The next six months will make for a nice test of neo-Keynesian contra-cyclical doctrine. According to the same mainstream economists who didn't see it coming in the first place, the various stimulus packages concocted by the US, EU, Japanese, and Chinese governments are just about to take effect and return the global economy to delicate, but definite growth. Needless to say, I don't buy it, but we after the next few weeks of correction we should see another wave of positive emotion during the summer doldrums that will take us to the fall. That's when it promises to get interesting.

It's also worth noting something that everyone seems to have conveniently forgotten. Obama's was the second stimulus package. The one presently under whispered discussion would be the third.

Mailvox: Senator Franken

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 10:46:00 +0000

After lamenting the lack of recently deceased freak show coverage on this blog, Witrack wonders if I have any interest in the living versions:

Are you going to comment on Al Franken now being a United States Senator?

I don't really have much to say about it, except that I recently received an email from Chad the Elder of the Fraters Libertas, who reminded me that I was sufficiently familiar with the fragile Minnesota psyche back in May 2004 to know that the ex-comedian's candidacy was no laughing matter:

I'd like to luxuriate in the joys of what Jonah Goldberg calls Frankenfreude as Air America loses executives and misses payrolls. But that's not possible now that Alice is bruiting about the idea of running for the Senate. In any other state, that might be laughable, but not in Minnesota. It's the one state where he could actually win. Do the words "Gov. Jesse Ventura" ring a bell?

First, Minnesota is one of the most reliably leftist states in the country. Second, the Star & Sickle, otherwise known as the Star Tribune, already loves Alice to distraction. Third, never underestimate the desperate Minneapolitan appetite for celebrity. You can't appreciate the meaning of trying too hard until you've read a local columnist hyperventilating over Minneapolis being compared to Des Moines instead of Paris. Fourth, Paul Wellstone. It could happen. And frankly, socionomics appears to predict it. I can't think of anyone, short of the Lizard Queen herself, better suited to help that grand supercycle wave get rolling.

That last sentence is rather fortuitous, seeing as how it's turned out to be Franken who gives the Senate Democrats a filibuster-proof majority, enabling Obama to torch the economy at will with an increasingly expansionary fiscal policy.

This should settle the question

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 14:15:00 +0000

What is more important to economic development, sex or a college education? Considering what so many of the women are studying, I'd bet on sex and the underperformance of an overeducated population contra the concept of a causal relationship between education and economic growth. Carpe Diem has more:

It's college graduation season, and according to data available from the U.S. Department of Education, an estimated 3,092,800 degrees will be granted this academic year (2008-2009) for Associate's degrees (714,000), Bachelor's degrees (1,585,000), Master's degrees (647,000), Professional degrees for MD, DDS and JD (91,000) and Doctor's degrees for Ph.D and Ed.D (55,800).

On a tangential note, I'd say that those 3 million degrees being granted on an annual basis are far past the limits of the economy's aggregate demand. Note that we haven't added a single net job to the economy since mid-2005 according to the BLS labor force statistics, so 12 million new additions to the labor force over the last four years have to find job openings based solely upon demographic attrition.

Unlike those who wring their hands about this, I think the problem will settle itself as such problems always do. The more unemployable women graduate with worthless degrees, the more the value of a degree will fall. Attempts to turn to government in order to forcibly maintain the value of their degrees will fail because of the limits on government action enforced by the ongoing economic contraction; the sort of men who start companies without college degrees will be very difficult to convince of the need for them or to waste valuable company resources on unproductive staff.

Rhetorical lunacy

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 13:07:00 +0000

Thus spake the Magic Negro:

The future does not belong to those who gather armies on a field of battle or bury missiles in the ground.

Someone has told him that he is the nominal Commander-in-Chief of one of the world's largest armies and largest buriers of missiles in the ground, right? Perhaps Mr. Teleprompter needs the history module installed.

The future belongs to those who show up for it.

Most favored bankstas

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 17:25:00 +0000

It's probably easier to make a case for shutting down Goldman Sachs as a threat to national security than bailing them out again:

The collective message of all this - the AIG bailout, the swift approval for its bank-holding conversion, the TARP funds - is that when it comes to Goldman Sachs, there isn't a free market at all. The government might let other players on the market die, but it simply will not allow Goldman to fail under any circumstances. Its edge in the market has suddenly become an open declaration of supreme privilege. "In the past it was an implicit advantage," says Simon Johnson, an economics professor at MIT and former official at the International Monetary Fund, who compares the bailout to the crony capitalism he has seen in Third World countries. "Now it's more of an explicit advantage." ...

And here's the real punch line. After playing an intimate role in four historic bubble catastrophes, after helping $5 trillion in wealth disappear from the NASDAQ, after pawning off thousands of toxic mortgages on pensioners and cities, after helping to drive the price of gas up to $4 a gallon and to push 100 million people around the world into hunger, after securing tens of billions of taxpayer dollars through a series of bailouts overseen by its former CEO, what did Goldman Sachs give back to the people of the United States in 2008?

Fourteen million dollars.

This is a remarkable tale of parasitical bankers living up to and exceeding every nasty stereotype of evil bankers. If I worked for Goldman Sachs, I'd be retiring before the end of the year and moving very far away from New York City. Once the depression hits in full force next year, a lot of Americans are going to be very, very unhappy. And thanks to Henry Paulson, they'll have a pretty good idea of who is at least somewhat responsible for their dire straits.

WND column

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 10:30:00 +0000

Irrational Finance
"The public in many countries is understandably concerned by the commitment of substantial government resources to aid the financial industry when other industries receive little or no assistance. This disparate treatment, unappealing as it is, appears unavoidable. Our economic system is critically dependent on the free flow of credit, and the consequences for the broader economy of financial instability are thus powerful and quickly felt."
– Ben Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve, Jan. 13, 2009

One of the more remarkable things about the expansion of the subprime financial crisis into a general economic contraction is the Federal Reserve System's narcissistic focus on itself. In his speeches, Ben Bernanke spends more time talking about the Federal Reserve's balance sheet and how stupendously fabulous it continues to be despite the vast quantities of loans it is making to shore up various aspects of the financial system than he does about the unemployment rate or the expected effects of economic contraction on the public.

Liberal Fascism - Chapter Three

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 10:00:00 +0000

I don't know about you, but I found Chapter Three to be the best and most informative thus far. Next week's reading is Chapter Four: Franklin Roosevelt’s Fascist New Deal and the quiz for it will be posted on Saturday, July 11th.

And this is the case for the defense?

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 18:56:00 +0000

The New York Times hosts an open debate on the value of a graduate degree:

"As an M.A. student in English, I don’t think I’ve met one person in my program, or one professor for that matter, who has expressed that he or she is “in it for the money.” In fact, most people, including myself, are there because they are genuinely interested in the subject matter, and in discourse with others who have similar interests... For M.A. students like myself, the benefits have little to do with money."

"What if knowledge itself is what you seek? Master’s of Arts and Liberal Arts degrees are not designed to get you a high paying career."

"The reason I went for my MLA (graduated in June 1997) was because I was fascinated by the subject matter. Has it paid off for me financially? No. In fact, I am no longer even employed. I have never even paid off my student loans, nor do I believe that will ever happen. Do I regret earning that MLA? No.... Learning how to learn appears to be the single, greatest lesson one can learn in going for the advanced degree."

"If you measure graduate degrees in dollars, mine Ph.D. is worthless. I earned less money with each graduate degree. If, however, you measure it in terms of quality of life, understanding of the world, personal satisfaction and the accomplishment of non-monetary goals, it is priceless."

One thing I've noticed is that no one contemplating spending thousands of dollars on a graduate degree ever admits that it's of no probable monetary value BEFORE they make the decision to go to grad school. Those who actually think the expense of a monetarily worthless graduate degree was worth it tend to fall into two categories. The first are grad students still in school who are enjoying the process and have neither begun paying the costs nor genuinely understand the consequences of being deeper in debt with no marketable job skill. I suppose that men utilizing the services of prostitutes also believe said services are worth the expense while in the midst of obtaining them. But they may well think otherwise upon discovering that their wallet is missing, learning that the test results are positive, or being handcuffed and reminded of their rights.

The second type are the sort who believe that their personal enjoyment trumps all concerns about expense. It should come as little surprise that these people usually also mention the importance of learning how to learn. In other words, these are the individuals who are dumb enough to genuinely require at least 17 years in school in order to learn how to learn, so the value of their opinion is quite high if taken in the negative.

It's fine if you genuinely enjoy taking classes so much that you're willing to spend thousands of dollars on them. But understand that doesn't make you any different than someone who enjoys spending thousands of dollars on cars, drugs, or professional women. The only significant difference is that the car, drug, or escort aficionado seldom believes he will become a better person through paying for his pleasures.

One of the saner, if sadder, perspectives on the matter was expressed by one recent purchaser of an advanced piece of paper from an advanced paper seller: "As one of the many now-graduated, now-unemployed Masters of Fine Arts, I have felt that this great accomplishment is akin to opening up a nicely-wrapped gift box, only to discover that it was empty." Except, of course, it wasn't exactly a gift....

A portrait in jealousy

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 10:59:00 +0000

Maureen Dowd considers Sarah Palin's resignation with all the intelligence and political astuteness we have learned to expect from her, colored by the emotional temperance of a head cheerleader forced to confront the reality of a new and prettier transfer student:

Caribou Barbie is one nutty puppy.... As Alaskans settled in to enjoy holiday salmon bakes and the post-solstice thaw, their governor had a solipsistic meltdown so strange it made Sparky Sanford look like a model of stability.

It's entirely possible that Palin resigned for reasons that are narcissistic, ambitious, greedy, or insane. But we simply don't know. The fact that she was smart enough not to offer an explanation when none short of imminent death from cancer would be considered sympathetic indicates that lunacy is the least plausible reason.

What I find most interesting is that two of the leading contenders for the GOP nomination appear, at least for the moment, to have taken themselves out of the running. If one considers this from the economic perspective of 2010 being 1931, it suggests that the prospect of being forced to deal with the challenges ahead is a daunting one. Unfortunately, these are the circumstances in which the human predators of the world tend to see their opportunities; to paraphrase Rahm Emmanuel, one never wants to waste a crisis.

I don't pretend to know why Palin resigned. Not being a supporter, I can't even say I particularly care. But I do know that it's far too soon to dig her political grave, as many in both the Republican and the Democratic parties are now attempting. As both Ronald Reagan, Hillary Clinton and even Newt Gingrich have demonstrated, it's always dangerous to assume a politician is finished. As a class, they're very much like zombies; never count one out entirely until you've actually seen it dismembered and burned.

Steve McNair killed

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 21:28:00 +0000

Former Titans quarterback Steve McNair has been killed. Police said McNair suffered a fatal gunshot wound to the head in downtown Nashville.

A real shame. I didn't follow McNair's career closely, but he struck me as the positive ideal on whom more ballyhooed but lesser quarterbacks like Michael Vick and Vince Young should have patterned themselves.

A treasure hunt

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 13:51:00 +0000

In case you could use a break from scarfing hamburgers while you wait for the evening fireworks, I'm looking for quotes from 2006 - 2009 about the prospects for recession and depression from every mainstream or contrarian figure of note. I've collected a fair number already, but the more, the merrier. I intend on grading them on the following curve:

Grade: A-
Another major problem is that the housing bubble has finally burst. Thus far it has only produced a slow leak, but by next year the air will be rushing out with gale force winds.... If Bernanke tries to borrow from Greenspan’s playbook and attempts to prevent or mitigate the severity of the coming recession, the excess liquidity will not simply move into another asset class, as it did from stocks to real estate, but into real stuff, such as commodities and consumer goods.
Peter Schiff, June 29, 2006

Grade: F
“As I’ve discussed on CNBC’s Kudlow & Co., the strong, across-the-board, five-month rally in stocks cannot possibly be predicting a recession. While the stock market can sometimes emit false positives on recessions, rarely does it give off false negatives. In fact, I think it is predicting a "Goldilocks" soft-landing for the economy.”
Larry Kudlow, Debunking Krugman’s Recession, December 2, 2006

The more direct the quote, the better. I don't care if it's positive or negative, as it's just as useful to have someone declaring there is no recession or there will not a depression as the contrary. I don't have much use for the mealy-mouthed attempts to have it both ways, though. Please include the date, the name of the economist or financial figure, and a link to the source along with the quote.

Provoking the Palindrones

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 18:18:00 +0000

Jonah Goldberg upsets fans of the Alaskan governor:

Dear Governor Palin,

You’re blowing it.

We haven’t met, but you might remember I was one of the first columnists to tout you for John McCain’s running mate. I cheered you mightily when Senator McCain selected you, and I still believe that you were the smartest choice he could have made given the obstacles before him. I’m also assuming you want to run for president some day.

I really don't see what Palin's more hysterical fans are so upset about. Goldberg is correct. Palin has great natural political gifts, but her performance as a vice-presidential candidate in 2008 was sub-par. If she makes the mistake of relying upon her natural talent rather than improving her game, she will likely lose the nomination since the GOP squish faction is gunning hard for her.

Although I correctly predicted Palin would be McCain's running mate, I'm not favorably impressed by her. Like Obama, she's just bright enough to think that she can coast through the big leagues, but that's only true when the powers-that-be are laying down the palm leaves for you. The fact that she let McCain's advisors tell her what to do told us all we needed to know about her capacity for judging some of the more complicated factors of national politics. If she's learned her lesson and is now playing for keeps, she'll listen to Republicans who wish her well, like Goldberg, while paying no attention to the likes of Brooks and Frum, who do not.

UPDATE: It seems Mrs. Palin may have taken Mr. Goldberg's advice too much to heart, seeing as how she immediately announced her resignation from the governorship.

The Best Little Whorehouse in Washington

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 14:14:00 +0000

Closes temporarily:

Washington Post publisher Katharine Weymouth said today she was canceling plans for an exclusive "salon" at her home where for as much as $250,000, the Post offered lobbyists and association executives off-the-record access to "those powerful few" — Obama administration officials, members of Congress, and even the paper’s own reporters and editors.... Weymouth said the paper had planned a series of dinners with participation from the newsroom “but with parameters such that we did not in any way compromise our integrity.

I don't see what the problem was. It's not as if they had any integrity to start with. Nor is it any secret as to why the media is dying so quickly, not with complete cretins like these in charge.

But it's an investment!

noreply@blogger.com (Vox) — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 10:24:00 +0000

I believe most regular readers are familiar with my opinion that taking out student loans in order to obtain pieces of paper from paper-selling institutions is usually a remarkably stupid idea. However, even those who think equate spending on education with investment must admit that the utility of the concept has its limits:

Robert Bowman was refused entry to the New York bar because of $400,000 in student debt.... “The size of this account is extremely unusual, but not surprising given that the customer took out 32 loans to pursue undergraduate, law and masters of law studies and has not made a single monthly payment over his 26-year student loan history,” Ms. Holler said.

Doesn't the New York bar know that that studies show people with graduate degrees make loads more money over their lifetime? With an investment of $400,000 in Mr. Bowman's education, surely he'll be worth hundreds of millions soon!

As if this story wasn't amusing enough, one can only wonder what Mr. Bowman would have to do in order to sufficiently establish: "the character and general fitness requisite for an attorney and counselor-at-law". Murder his mother with an axe? Rape a baby seal? Run an underage gay prostitution ring?