Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Websites and blogs I recommend
Blog Archive
-
▼
2010
(353)
-
▼
July
(29)
- Barker's Newsbites: Friday, July 30, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, July 29, 2010
- U.S. v. Arizona -- No. CV 10-1413-PHX-SRB
- Barker's Newsbites: Wednesday, July 28, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Tuesday, July 27, 2010
- Summer Reading 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Monday, July 26, 2010
- Weekend Newsbites: Sat. & Sun., July 24 & 25, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Friday, July 23, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, July 22, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Wednesday, July 21, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Tuesday, July 20, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Monday, July 19, 2010
- Weekend Newsbites: Sat. & Sun., July 17 & 18, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Friday, July 16, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, July 15, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Wednesday, July 14, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Tuesday, July 13, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Monday, July 12, 2010
- Deputy Assistant Attorney General Julie Fernandes
- Weekend Newsbites: Sat. & Sun., July 10 & 11
- Barker's Newsbites: Friday, July 9, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, July 8, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Wednesday, July 7, 2010
- Barker's Newsbites: Tuesday, July 6, 2010
- Weekend Newsbites: Sat., Sun., & Mon., July 3/4/5
- Barker's Newsbites: Friday, July 2, 2010
- Operation Wetback
- Barker's Newsbites: Thursday, July 1, 2010
-
▼
July
(29)
About Me
- William R. Barker
- Pearl River, NY High School Class of '81; Northeastern University, Boston, MA Class of '87.
8 comments:
* TWO-PARTER... (Part 1 of 2)
http://www.minyanville.com/businessmarkets/articles/overconsumption-economy-consumers-finance-investors-economcy/7/23/2010/id/29290
It took 20 years of over-consumption and living beyond their incomes for Americans to get to their current economic state; the elected officials in Washington, DC, continue to hunt for a quick fix, one that just doesn’t exist.
The consumer is simply carrying too much debt. In the US, consumption represents 70% of GDP, but the consumers’ debt/GDP ratio, which spurted from 100% in 2001 to more than 135% in 2008, still stands at 126%, nearly three years after the recession began.
* OH... AND HERE'S THE KICKER:
Much of the nine-percentage-point decline is due to financial institution write-offs as opposed to debt repayment...
(*SIGH*)
Short of the government waiving its wand and pronouncing that all debt is now magically repaid, the next healthy economic upswing must await the healing of household balance sheets.
(*SNORT*) (*CYNICAL CHUCKLE*)
Unfortunately, to get a healthy consumer balance sheet, savings must increase to repay the debt, which leaves less for consumption. Lower consumption means slower economic growth with all the attendant implications for employment. This is known in the economics profession as “the paradox of thrift."
(*SHRUG*)
* SO WHAT DO THE POLITICIANS AND ECONOMIC "EXPERTS" SUCH AS GEITHNER AND BERNANKE PROPOSE...?
[T]hey promote ill-conceived schemes that wind up only prolonging the agony - like "Cash for Clunkers" and the “homebuyer tax credit." These programs promote more debt which will have to be reduced in the future, so they simply wind up pulling demand forward at the expense of economic growth a quarter or two out, and prolonging the adjustment, as more debt now needs to be worked off.
* To be continued...
CONTINUING... (Part 2 of 2)
Financial institutions will continue to struggle. ... [W]hile financial “operating profits” appear to have recovered (leading to large management bonuses), below the surface, large write-offs and one-time charges continue. And it's quite apparent from the state of the housing industry and from the condition of consumer balance sheets that large foreclosure related write-offs will continue.
[S]maller financial institutions have loan portfolio issues of their own. These are the institutions that are the lenders to the local communities and to small businesses. While some of these just won’t survive, the majority that do will be capital-constrained, meaning that they won’t be able to increase their loan portfolios. Unlike their big-brother brethren, these institutions have little or no access to raise capital via Wall Street. Thus, small businesses will continue to experience a credit crunch, and small business expansion, with its commensurate job creation, will continue to be non-existent. (This is clearly shown in the latest bank-loan data. Three years after the recession began, commercial and industrial loans in the banking system continue to rapidly contract.)
* FOLKS... PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO THE FOLLOWING; WHILE I'VE MENTIONED IT TIME AND AGAIN, FOLKS JUST DON'T SEEM TO GET THAT THE FINANCIAL GAME FOR THE BIG BANKS IS "FIXED" AND THAT THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER IS THE CHUMP ON THE HOOK FOR THE "PROFITS" THE BANKS ARE MAKING DUE TO THE GAME BEING RIGGED.
The Treasury has become more and more dependent on the Wall Street banks to finance its exploding borrowing needs. Because they're considered “safe," no capital is required for banks to hold US Treasury securities. As long as the Fed promises to keep the Fed funds rate at 0%, the large banks can “borrow” from each other, from the Fed, or from the public (via deposits) at a near 0% rate and buy the 10-year “riskless” T-Note at 3%. Why should they make risky loans to the private sector which require additional capital on the balance sheet? Of course, the artificially “low” deposit rate is borne by the public; this is simply a continuation of the big bank bailout.
* BOTTOM LINE:
For the next few years, given the debt constraints on US consumer budgets, the continued high unemployment expectation, the inevitability of growth slowing tax increases, the poor state of housing, continued high write-offs at financial institutions and their capital constraints, and the horrible condition of state and local government finances, it's really difficult to make any kind of a case for healthy economic growth.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/cf31acce-969d-11df-9caa-00144feab49a.html
BP will start deep-water drilling off the coast of Libya within weeks in spite of concerns about the UK group’s environmental and safety record after the Gulf of Mexico oil spill disaster.
At 1,700 metres below sea-level in Libya’s Gulf of Sirte, the well will be 200 metres deeper than the Macondo well in the Gulf of Mexico which triggered the worst US offshore oil spill disaster when the Deepwater Horizon rig exploded on April 20, killing 11 people.
“Drilling will start within a few weeks,” BP confirmed.
* HEY... (*SMIRK*)... MAYBE EMPEROR OBAMA (THE GUY WEARING NO CLOTHES) COULD ISSUE A WORLDWIDE NO DRILLING ORDER? (*SNICKER*)
* SERIOUS POINT... TENS OF THOUSANDS OF AMERICANS LOSE THEIR JOBS - THEIR LIVELIHOODS - BECAUSE OBAMA CAN BULLY BP AND OTHERS IN PARTS OF THE GULF OF MEXICO, BUT AS FOR THE WORLD ENVIRONMENT... NOTHING HAS GOTTEN SAFER. IF ANYTHING, I'M GUESSING SAFETY STANDARDS WILL BE LOWER UNDER LYBIAN "REGULATION" THAN THEY WOULD BE IF THE DRILLING WAS TAKING PLACE HERE IN AMERICAN WATERS.
Barack Obama’s imposition of a moratorium on deep-water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico has highlighted the growing importance of new exploration across the Mediterranean. Diamond Offshore, a US deep-water driller, is moving a rig from the Gulf of Mexico to Egypt, while Australia’s APX started drilling last week between Tunisia and Italy. Shell plans to start exploring soon off western Sicily.
* GREAT JOB OBAMA! (*SMIRK*)
http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/07/24/afghanistan.us.troops.killed/index.html?section=cnn_latest
Bombings killed five U.S. troops in southern Afghanistan on Saturday...
* AND NO ONE IS "SAFER" BECAUSE ANOTHER FIVE OF OUR FELLOW CITIZENS ARE DEAD.
[T]he troops died in "improvised explosive device attacks."
* NINE F--KING YEARS AND WE STILL HAVE NOTHING THAT CAN IDENTIFY AN IED FROM A SAFE DISTANCE AWAY.
June was the deadliest month for international troops since the war began: 60 Americans were among 102 international troops slain, according to a CNN count of military figures.
This month, more than 70 international troops have died. That total includes more than 50 U.S. service members.
* AND FOR WHAT...???
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/25/weekinreview/25bumiller.html?ref=world
The conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have cost Americans a staggering $1 trillion to date, second only in inflation-adjusted dollars to the $4 trillion price tag for World War II, when the United States put 16 million men and women into uniform and fought on three continents.
* AND HAS IT BEEN WORTH IT? HELL NO!
In terms of costs per warrior, the current wars appear to be the most expensive ever, according to Todd Harrison, a senior fellow for defense budget studies at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. Working independently of the Pentagon and of the Congressional study, and using computations based on the number of troops committed to the actual conduct of war at any one time, he estimates that the annual cost today is $1.1 million per man or woman in uniform in Afghanistan...
(*JUST SHAKING MY HEAD*)
http://www.stripes.com/news/middle-east/iraq/state-dept-planning-to-field-a-small-army-in-iraq-1.111839
Can diplomats field their own army? The State Department is laying plans to do precisely that in Iraq...
Under the terms of a 2008 status of forces agreement, all U.S. troops must be out of Iraq by the end of 2011, but they’ll leave behind a sizable American civilian presence, including the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, the largest in the world, and five consulate-like "Enduring Presence Posts" in the Iraqi hinterlands.
In little more than a year, State Department contractors in Iraq could be driving armored vehicles, flying aircraft, operating surveillance systems, even retrieving casualties if there are violent incidents and disposing of unexploded ordnance.
A report July 12 by the bipartisan legislative Commission on Wartime Contracting said that the number of State Department security contractors would more than double, from 2,700 to between 6,000 and 7,000, under current plans.
"The fact that we’re transitioning from one poorly managed contracting effort to another part of the federal government that has not excelled at this function either is not particularly comforting," said Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo.
"It’s one thing" for contractors to be "peeling potatoes" and driving trucks, McCaskill told McClatchy. "It’s another thing for them to be deploying MRAPs and Black Hawk helicopters."
http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/the-financial-services--reform--mess-99190934.html
* BY J.C. WATTS --
During my service in Congress, whenever legislation was dubbed "reform" it was especially necessary to analyze the details and consequences. So it is with congressional passage of President Barack Obama's financial services "reform"- the biggest expansion of government power over banks and private markets since the Great Depression.
The Wall Street Journal reports that the 2,300-page law - crafted by Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-CT and Rep. Barney Frank, D-MA - requires no fewer than 243 new rules by 11 federal agencies.
"A general attack on our free enterprise system," is how a frustrated U.S. Chamber of Commerce describes the law that will make it tougher for consumers and small businesses to borrow money.
Harvey Pitt, a former head of the Securities and Exchange Commission, is especially blunt. He says this so-called reform is "likely to take a badly broken regulatory system and make it worse. This legislation fixes nothing, accomplishes nothing, yet promises everything."
"Legal and consulting fees will skyrocket. This bill is truly the 'Lawyers and Consultants' Full Employment Act of 2010. Most of the attempted reforms are poorly drafted or contain loopholes so large that a fleet of trucks could get past the supposed barriers. Where the bill accomplishes something it is likely to harm competition and boost the performance of commercial and investment banks outside the U.S.," Pitt says.
* SOUNDS DELIGHTFUL, DOESN'T IT...
Will this bill prevent another crisis like the one that erupted in October of 2008? Absolutely not. ... Perhaps most infuriating is this financial overhaul ignores the fate of the mortgage-finance giants that fueled the housing bubble that led to the 2008 meltdown - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which own or guarantee over $5 trillion of the nation's $10 trillion of mortgages.
Dodd says this legislation ends the "too big to fail" debate. Not so.
Freddie Mac lost another $6.7 billion the first quarter of 2010 and therefore needs another big cash infusion from taxpayers. Combined with Fannie Mae's gouging of the taxpayers, the Congressional Budget Office estimates the American people will spend $389 billion bailing out these two misfits by 2019. And Dodd continues to claim that taxpayers are no longer exposed to "too big to fail."
Congress could have strengthened the existing bankruptcy system, and actually allowed firms "too big to fail" to go under. But the Democrat leadership would never allow it. That, you see, would defeat the goal of this latest "reform"- [which is] to transfer even more power to the federal government.
(*SIGH*)
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/white-house-backed-release-of-lockerbie-bomber-abdel-baset-al-megrahi/story-e6frg6so-1225896741041
The US government secretly advised Scottish ministers it would be "far preferable" to free the Lockerbie bomber than jail him in Libya.
The document, acquired by a well-placed US source, threatens to undermine US President Barack Obama's claim last week that all Americans were "surprised, disappointed and angry" to learn of Megrahi's release.
* IF THIS IS TRUE...
(*GRITTING MY TEETH*)
The intervention, which has angered US relatives of those who died in the attack, was made by Richard LeBaron, deputy head of the US embassy in London, a week before Megrahi was freed in August last year...
The US has tried to keep the letter secret, refusing to give permission to the Scottish authorities to publish it on the grounds it would prevent future "frank and open communications" with other governments.
* YEAH... I BET!
* I WANT THE TRUTH.
* NOW... IN THE INTERESTS OF FAIRNESS, HERE'S THE SAME STORY AS REPORTED BY THE TELEGRAPH - A FAR MORE SYMPATHETIC TELLING...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/scotland/7909248/US-preferred-compassionate-release-of-Lockerbie-bomber-says-Alex-Salmond.html
Scotland's First Minister Alex Salmond said today that while America ''didn't want'' Abdelbaset al-Megrahi to be released, they would rather see him freed on account of his terminal cancer, than under the prisoner transfer agreement between the UK and Libya.
* AND ON A SCALE OF 1-10 I'D LOVE AN HONEST, FORTHRIGHT APPRAISAL FROM MINISTER SALMOND OF HOW SERIOUS HE VIEWED THE ADMINISTRATION'S "OBJECTIONS" TO THE RELEASE.
Megrahi is the only person convicted of the 1988 bombing in which 270 people were killed.
Speaking to Sky News today, Mr Salmond said: ''I think a fair description of the American Government's position is that they didn't want al-Megrahi to be released.
''However, if he was to be released, they thought it was far preferable for compassionate release as opposed to the prisoner transfer agreement.''
* HMM... AGAIN WITH THIS "DIDN'T WANT" BUSINESS. NOTHING ABOUT "OUTRAGE" OR EVEN "OBJECTED IN THE STRONGEST POSSIBLE TERMS."
But the American Ambassador to the UK Louis Susman said the US had ''strongly objected'' to any type of release.
He said the US was examining whether its correspondence over the issue could be released but refused to be drawn on the reported memo.
* I WANT TO SEE THOSE MEMOS.
The US Senate Foreign Relations Committee announced plans for an inquiry into the bomber's release, but Scottish justice secretary Kenny MacAskill and former foreign secretary Jack Straw have both rejected calls to give evidence in person.
Post a Comment