Romney/Ryan: Disaster of Unintended Consequences?

I am a supporter of the Romney Ryan ticket.  I am a strong supporter of Paul Ryan (somewhat disappointed that following a WIN he will be relegated to the back shelf).  I am a skeptical supporter of Governor Romney.  That being said, I would have voted for the Governor regardless of Paul Ryan's selection.  I suspect that the Romney Ryan ticket will win in November.  I've done my part: vote already submitted.  What concerns me however, is what will happen when the ticket actually takes office.  Maybe even before the ticket takes office.

The great thing for the reader is that I am not a prophet.  I can't think of too much of anything that I have ever predicted would come true, actually did come true.  So, maybe you're in Luck.  Nevertheless, this thought has stuck with me for weeks on end.  So I am going to write it down.  Since 2008 our M1 money supply (the amount of actual dollars in the market place) has arguably increased by 300%.  Currently, the FED is pumping $40 billion a month into the system as a function of QE3.  Leaning as I do toward an Austrian understanding of the economic cycle I am very nervous about all that money out there.  I can remember 4 years ago telling my son to watch as inflation kicked in.  That you can't print money out of thin air like the FED is doing, and not de-value the monetary supply.  As I sit here today, inflation has hardly budged.  Why?  I suspect that the very reason that we do not have a robust recovery underway, is the very reason we have little or no inflation.  I suspect that this money is sitting out there, in banks, in bank accounts, in businesses and all the institutions that normally use and spread large amounts of cash.  It hasn't made it in to the marketplace because in spite of making the money available, no one is actually using it.  This, because there is no business entity out there that has confidence enough in the economy to actually take a risk with that money.  I believe they are afraid.  I believe they are afraid of the current administration.  The fear of regulation, taxation, unknown regulatory costs, has served to prevent that money from being breathed into the US economy.  So, what happens when the Romney/Ryan win results in a collective exhale by businesses and institutions that effectively spews all that M1 from it's safe, inflation avoiding locations and into the market place in the form of consumption and investment?  Inflation.  And, if the hypothesis is correct it will be huge massive and unprecedented inflation.

I hope I am wrong.  I hope that Romney's 5 point plan will be all that he says it will be.  May my poor track record continue.  We can only hope.    

Privacy for the sake of Posterity

I find that the ideas behind the cultural imperative created by our social networking technology to expose all of our thoughts, actions and behaviors to public access fascinating.  Alan Dershowitz explains how this becomes problematic and encourages all to think about the consequences of information "sharing" without considering the long term ramifications.  

It would seem that there are tremendous opportunities to those that would get into developing how and why it is important to protect our right to privacy.  I don't often agree with Mr. Dershowitz on his views and policy recommendations but on this topic of protection of a concept to a "right" to privacy is one issue that we can agree upon.   

Is Condi Good for America?

Condoleeza Rice, the National Security Advisor and eventual Secretary of State for George W. Bush gave a speech last week at the 4th of July fundraiser among the big dog supporters of Mitt Romney.  Here is the speech.  Below I have detailed an ad hoc transcript of the speech.  Not perfectly transcribed, but I did my best.  It was definitely interesting.  Inspiring?  I'm not so sure.  What do you think?

Condi Transcript

Seeking the consent of the American people for Government and as President of the United States we sometimes forget that that is exactly what is happening here.  We live in a country where people have to ask for our consent to govern us. And I want to thank you for putting yourself forward for that.  It's not an easy path for you, Thank you very much. 

I also want to note two more things.  The first is that governor Romney has, uh, told me that I am all that stands between you and lunch so, uh, I will try to be brief.  And secondly as the governor has said I have been out now for three and a half years I've been back at Stanford.  Not a bad place to be and I am very often asked what the biggest difference between being out of government and being in government.  There are alot of difference but the most important one is that I get up every morning, I read the newspapers, and I say, "Isn't that interesting."  And I go right on with whatever else I might do.  Because I am no longer responsible for what is in the newspaper.  But like you I am concerned about the state of our country and the state of our world.  And that is why we are gathered here on this day, in this beautiful setting to do what must be done and that is to support and, ah,  help deliver the election of um,  Mitt Romney for President of the United States.    We live in, ah, turbulent times.  And where in turbulent times because the international system has been through three great shocks in the last decade or so.  First of all there was the shock of 9/11.  And I can tell you that if you were in a position of authority on September 11... ... his phone kept ringing and ringing and I turned around and a plane had hit the pentagon.  From that time on your concept of what constitutes physical security has never been the same.  The United States of American from that day on would know that failed states in places like Afgahnistan and Yemen and Libya and other places in many ways become our security threats.  And we would avoid another attack on our territory, not because we weren't trying, but because we were vigilent of our security people, of our intelligence people.  But most importantly because we have young men and women who volunteer, they volunteer, at the front lines of freedom to defend us.    And then there was this other great shock.  This global, international and economic crisis.  As much as 9/11 challenged our concept of the global international economic shock would challenge what constitutes economic security and responsibility.  And you would see in this country people who .  I remember when I was a little girl and my grandfather said to my Mother, "Anne, you and John need to buy a house as soon as you can because the value of a house never goes down."  And so imagine how Americans feel now as they watch the value of their homes become less than what they paid for them.  And for those people who really think that they have been unemployed for a long as ever a time to have a job.  And that has reverberated around the world and we see Europe, and we see even slow growth in the emerging markets.  And we wonder, when again will we get to economic growth, led by the private sector, in which we, once again obtain, a hopeful future for economic prosperity.  And so our concept of economic security has changed.  And then there has been a third shock.  And that's the Arab Spring.  Which in many ways, that is the most dramatic of all of these shocks.  Because you see, people are seizing the very right to the freedom that we enjoy.  The right to say what you please.  To as you please.  To secret police and to have those that govern you ask for your .  What you're seeing in the middle east is what happens when .  Because every authoritary regime experiences or will experience what I call a Csicescu moment.  Now that the day when Nicolai Csicescu the dictator of Romania stood in a square in before 250,000 people, revolution was occuring all over eastern Europe Czechloslovakia, Germany and he was exhorting them to what he could do for them.  What he had done for them.  And all of the sudden and he turned to run and a young military officer ... .  The Cxicesu moment is when what seperates the dictator from his people, fear.......a policeman gives way at the Berlin wall and all that is left is the anger.  And that is what you see in the middle east.  So again these three great shocks have potentially restored the foundations of the international system?  And, yes it's chaotic and tumultuous but what there revealing most is not that .  But what we are experiencing is the absence of American leadership.  Because you see, when there isn't a country that has a view ...they have no....  The don't know that there is an anchor and the United States should bring that view.  That view is that free markets and free people hold the future.  That free markets and free people will reap the profits.  That free market and free people will ultimately lead .  And when the United States doesn't lead, when our friends aren't certain that they can count on us - and they aren't so certain right now - and when our foes don't fear us, or respect us, this is what you get.  Tumultous, dangerous, chaotic times.  The world seeks, desires, American leadership.  Yes, they fuss about it sometimes, but when the United States of American decides that it's just gonna be any old country.  That it is gonna be governed by the uncommon denominator/collective will of the international community through the United Nations, this is what you get.  And that is why we have got to elect a President who understands that the United States of America are going to have to lead, have to inspire the people of the United States of American to want to lead.  And, does it not prove, high flown rhetoric about hope and change.  But through an essence and ...  that they know that this is truly an exceptional country.  That we are not just "any other country".  "Any other country" would not have sent young men to storm the beaches of Normandy for the rights and freedoms of people that .  "Any country", would not have been vigilent in Asia or great Japan and North Korea.  And "just any old country" would not in Khandahar and try to deliver a better future to those peoples.  And with that future a better and more secure future for ourselves.  

And so, we have got to have a president of the United States who understands the essence of who we are, and by the way that is not just a factor of what we do in the international community at large, it starts with who we are at home and you cannot lead the American people to lead the international system if you do not lead them to repair the damage we are at home.  That means, getting our internal house in order. It means dealing with the deficits, it means dealing with entitlements, it means not living beyond our means, it means no more borrowing money that we cannot afford.  It means recognizing that this countries success comes through stability and mobilized individuals that is better than any other experiement in history.  And we have done it because we believe that it doesn't matter where you came from, it matters where you're going.  And that experiment has brought people here from around the world for generations to be a part of that. Sergei Brin came here at 7 years old and founded Google.  And who come from and get a good education and then go on to do great things.  And unless we deal with the crisis that we have we are going to lose a very important part of ourselves.  When I can look at your zip code and I can tell if you're going to get a good education or not .  We're losing the essence of who we are.  It is and a narrative that is not American.  It is a narrative that is pushed .  "That I am doing poorly, because you are doing well."  That has never been the American narrative.  Ours has never been a narrative of agrievement and ours has never been a narrative of entitlement.  It has been one of .  And that too, And that too, is why we need a change in Washington.  We need a change in Washington because the essence of who we are as Americans is really at stake.  And since the essence of who we are as Americans is at stake, also is the essence of what the international community will become.  

And don't think for a minute that if we don't lead, someone won't.  And that someone might be a country that doesn't believe in free markets and free people.  That would be bad for , that would be bad for our dollar.  It would be bad for prosperity and security and peace.  That is why it is time for all of us, in any way that we can, to mobilize, to get our act together, to storm Washington DC with somebody who understands better.  Thank you everyone.         

When "capitalism" goes Wrong

The point about capitalism and commercialism of late, is that they have really preached the extension of business rather than the preservation of belongings; and have at best tried to disguise the pickpocket with some of the virtues of the pirate.          The Outline of Sanity - GK Chesterton, 1927/

NAR: Charismania on Steroids

More thoughts on the NAR.  From John MacArthur's sermon on the Holy Spirit:

What’s going on today is the opposite, attributing to the Holy Spirit the work of Satan. That’s what’s going on. Attributing to the Holy Spirit the work of Satan. Satan is alive and at work in deception, false miracles, bad theology, lying visions, lying dreams, lying revelations, deceptive teachers who are in it for the money and power and influence. Satan is alive and well and the work of Satan is being attributed to the Holy Spirit, that is a serious blasphemy just as attributing to Satan the work of the Holy Spirit is a serious blasphemy.

The latest wave of this, I’ll just give you one illustration, the latest wave of this that is gaining traction and has entered into the sort of national news is a new form of Charismania, bringing reproach on the Holy Spirit called the New Apostolic Reformation, NAR, the New Apostolic Reformation. It is not new, it is not apostolic, and it is not a reformation, by the way. It is like Grape Nuts, it’s not grapes and it’s not nuts, it’s like Christian Science, it’s not Christian and it’s not scientific. Well the New Apostolic Reformation isn’t new, it isn’t apostolic and it isn’t a reformation. But it is a rapidly expanding movement being generated by some of the same old troubling false teachers and false leaders that have been around in Charismania for decades, always dishonoring the Holy Spirit, always dishonoring the Scripture, always claiming miracle signs, wonders, visions, dreams....

....There was a couple of weeks ago, a few weeks ago now, a prayer breakfast in the city of Houston that you may have read about. It was an event sponsored by the New Apostolic Reformation and their leaders and the guests and the main speaker there was Rick Perry, who is a candidate for the Republican Party for President. At this event sponsored by the New Apostolic Reformation, two pastors were leading in this event. They are apostles. They have been given apostleship by the Holy Spirit. They called Rick Perry’s office, as governor of the state of Texas, and told him that the Lord had revealed to them through the Holy Spirit that Texas is the state that God has chosen to lead the United States into revival and godly government and Rick Perry is to play a key role. And at that event, these two apostles of the New Apostolic Reformation Movement, laid hands on Rick Perry and prayed over him. They claim that God speaks directly to them specific instruction…specific instruction. And if people fail to listen to this divine revelation that comes through them, there will be more earthquakes, more terrorist attacks and worse economic conditions....Now you know where this all comes from. This is again attributing to the Holy Spirit the work of Satan. I don’t know what Rick Perry knows or doesn’t know about all of this, you know, in a campaign year, you take the prayers from anybody especially if you’re not sure what this is all about. But this is just one illustration of the aberrations that continue to be placed on the back of the Holy Spirit as if these are things that He is doing. It is such a frightening, frightening form of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit....

Confidence Men - Notables

"Presidents are amoung the few mortals who are sometimes graced with chances to change a culture. Throughout a windswept march, the country had been working to dislodge some of the era's prevailing certainties about markets being efficient, about people--- economically, at least--- getting what they deserve, along with the concomitant belief that financial barons are brilliant and indispensable, and manufacturing executives are dinosaurs. With the eyes of the country on him, Barack Obama ended the the month by shielding Wall Street executives agains these winds of cultural change, while he fired a man who had effectively managed four hundred thousand workers in their making of seven million cars a year-- without bothering to meet him. At the same time, he agreed to try to bail out Chrysler, and eventually GM, by adopting the practices and principals of private equity in the use of government funds." p241 "Someone said to me the other day that history produces great leaders. But I don't think that's quite right. I think the American people produce great leaders. The fact that they took a guy who was four years out of the Illinois Senate and made him the president, but insist that he run every mile of the race to get there, clear every hurdle, run every gauntlet-- there's wisdom in that....but now, 5 months along he [Axelrod] and his boss were furiously trying to run up steep and unforgiving learning curves." p 283 "The confidence of a nation rests on trust and can endure for years after this trust has been broken. But it cannot endure indefinitelyif the foundation of trust is not at some point earned. Confidence is the immaterial residue of material actions: justly enforced laws, sound investments, solidly built structures, the well-considered decisions of experts and professionals. Confidence is the public face of competence. Separating the two -- gaining the trust without earning it -- is the age old work of confidence men." p292 "The president received the report on May 15. it took just a few days for Summers to hear about it. He found out through Emmanuel. Orszag looked up from his desk. Summers had stormed over from the White House to Orszag's office, and his face was red with rage. It looked like he was about to burst a blood vessel. He told Orszage he'd found out about the paper. He said that he, Peter, knew the rules, no matter what the president had said. Everything was supposed to go through NEC....[Summers] What you've done is IMMORAL!..." p 297 On Peter Orszag writing a summary report at Obama's direction to get it directly to him. "'What is my narrative?' he all but shouted. 'I don't have a narrative.' Of course he was right. The extraordinary story of Barack Obama -- a boy, so truly African American, who was blown between countries and households before finding his solid stance in the United States and then racing upward through its meritocracy-- no longer seemed pertinent to almost anything he was doing. It was, no doubt, always a narrative of 'up ahead, a dream of what would be': of how he would bind the country into an enlarged ideal of shared purpose, integrating its dissonant chords into a melody as elegant and surely struck as he, himself, appeared to be. Instead, he had vanished into a cloud of endless policy debates and irreconcilable factions, of bold words -- still hoping to summon the magic -- so often divorced from measurable deeds. Bit by bit, month by month the first narrative had faded, even if plenty of people felt it's presence, like the ghost of a lost limb. 'He was right' one of the participants that morning recalled. 'He had no narrative. No story. For someone like Obama, that's like saying I don't know who I am. That I've lost my way." p 372

Confidence Men

A new book by one of Washington's primary journalists came out in the last month.  Ron Suskind, who wrote of the sordid misdeeds of the Bush administration has given his take on President Obama's first 3 years in office.  Chock full of information, interviews and storyline from primary players in the administration the book is being hailed by conservatives as proof positive that the President didn't/doesn't know what he is doing and indeed, appears to have the Washington elite closest to Obama wondering what hit them.  Apparently, Suskind was given access to the top players with the idea that his book would paint a strong and confident picture of the President and his administration.  The Obama elite, instead seem to be taking this as a hit job.  I understand why they think this, but my opinion is that the book positions him pretty uniquely, if not well, for his attempted re-election.  The book itself is divided into three sub-books entitled:  The Two Capitals, Home Alone, The Education of Barack Obama.

The Two Capitals mostly details his rise and highlights the hope and expecation of both the genius's make up his support team and the electorate.  Suskin's narrative weaves in and out of the run up to the election with a starting point in September 2010 and looking back.  A good deal of this reads like a novella detailing the early brushes with Wall illuminati that allowed him to understand the markets.  Between the informational growing spurts, the enlightment on Wall Streets transgressions and the coming fall-out that, according to the narrative, the soon to be President was told was a matter of when - not if, this book details a compelling lead up to his ultimate inauguration.  It details the wonderment and even awe - and occasional distaste that the President felt about his rapid rise in favor amoung the people.  (47)  Finally, this section details the transition team.  Presumably this is where the sections from which the title "The Two Capitals" comes.  I would say that I don't quite understand it's emphasis as a section title since really only the 7th chapter deals with post-election ending as events actually did, with the climax of his inauguration.  The title suggests to discuss the oddly symbiotic relationship of George Bush (seemingly) going into seclusion in Washington and  Barack Obama (seemingly) running things from Chicago.  Except that George Bush is never brought up so apparently it should be common knowledge to the reader.  The seed of quirks in personality, pride and sometimes pomposity of staffing that would contribute to an (at least early) organizational dysfunction are finally in place.

Home Alone  describes the President through his early learning of issues in general management.  These lessons according to the narrative were largely in setting his own agend and not allowing the agenda to be set for him.  Geithner and Summers are highlighted as strong personalities early.  But then, in a story woven to highlight the strong leadership skills of the new president, we visualize a meeting with staff to discuss priorities:  Healthcare or Economic Focus.  In the absence of his primary health care expert, the former Senator Tom Daschle the president calls on a tentative assistant to Daschle to defend Healthcare as the priority.  The poor fellow is trounced by the minds in the room until the President puts him out of his misery, "Ok, enough, enough...I'll play Daschle." (178)  Upon which the President flips the rolls and trumps all the smartest guys in the room.  Healthcare becomes the early focus.  That's not to say he wasn't rolled however.  The book details Rahm Emmanual derailing talks to "rip the bandaid off" and enable true reform with forcible and punctuated language that may as well have been a punch in the stomach to Christina Romer. (219)  This, after the President seemed to be leaning toward a more industry harsh, "bad bank" solution from Romer and Summers.

The final section seems to highlight his ongoing education.  Details how President Obama realized that his team was manipulated situations (if not him) and he was not truly making or implementing policy as he was directing it to be made or managed.  He attributes this largely to the learning process and in effect the book argues that we might consider the first four years as a down payment and that to be fair he really needs another 4 years to work out the details.  The Obama administration seemed a bit shell shocked when the book came out but I suspect that this will be a good jumping off point for them to persuade the American people not to give up on him yet. 

There were several things that discouraged me as I read the book.  The first is that the people that who are in charge of the government are the exact same people that instigated the laws and regulatory environment that allowed it to happen.  Lawrence Summers (Citi and repeal of Glass Stegall), Rahm Emmanual (Fannie), Timothy Geithner (New York Fed, TARP) Ben Bernanke (QE's).   These guys are smart enough to figure out how to rob the american people in a way that is either legal or there is no controling legal authority.  I am bewildered that the President feels that it is wise to work with the very individuals that allowed this mess to occur - and in fact capitalized on the loop holes they created in their roles - to help his resolve what is the most critical economic challenge in my lifetime.  The second thing that I am amazed at is that no one seems interested in truly resolving the problem.  Their plan seems to be do whatever you must in order to make people feel confidence in the market place, and then the market will come back.  Wouldn't it seem wise to work on underlying principals that would actually provide us with strong fundementals?  What must be done to accomplish a fundementally strong financial infrastructure?  How do we drive business toward growth rather than making it more difficult to make money.  How do we discourage the gambling mentality of our financial service sector that provides nothing but naked profit?  Something from nothing?  There must be a way to retstrain the gambling markets and contract the productive markets.  And yet we have no positive suggestions from the smartest guys in the room.