Does Austerity Work? After Years of It Is Greece Turning the Corner?

The Experts – The Ones Usually Wrong – Say Yes;  The Data Says . . .

Hoping desperately for a win, the people who promoted austerity as an economic policy for Greece, with the results that the country plunged into a nightmare recession, are now saying maybe Greece has turned the corner and is starting to recover.

Perhaps ‘thriving’ is somewhat optimistic, but there are signs of a turnround in Greece’s austerity-hit economy. Deep spending cuts should produce a primary budget surplus this year, deposits are returning to the banking sector, business confidence is recovering, and after five years of recession the economy is forecast to start growing next year.

Of course thriving in the above sense does not mean reducing unemployment, or bringing a better life to working families.  It means maybe a profit is to be had for hedge funds.

Hedge funds such as Farallon Capital Management, York Capital Management, QVT Financial and Dromeus Capital have signed up to help plug the capital gap in Alpha Bank, Greece’s second-biggest lender, and other hedge funds are understood to be considering participating in other bank recapitalisations.

“Obviously it is a judgment call: you need to determine whether Greece is bottoming out,” says Achilles Risvas, managing partner of Dromeus, a hedge fund set up specifically to target Greece. But “Greece is one of the highest potential return environments globally”.

But in the real world, where people other than obscenely rich investors live things are not so great.

The face of Greece today
Thanks to European Imposed Austerity

This is all hard to square with some of Greece’s economic fundamentals. According to Elstat, Greece’s economy is now smaller than it was in 2005, having shrunk a cumulative 28 percent since mid-2008. The European Commission forecasts a further contraction of 4.2 percent in 2013, which will be difficult to achieve given that the decline in the first quarter was so much larger.

Target Pipedream

The nature of economic activity in Greece also suggests that the European Commission’s growth target is a pipe dream. Although hedge funds have been active in buying Greek sovereign debt and made a killing doing so, the number of investments in the private sector can be counted on one hand. In addition to corporate-debt sales -- amounting to $2 billion so far this year, according to the consulting firm Dealogic -- Third Point LLC announced a 60 million-euro investment in Greece’s Energean Oil & Gas SA last week. These are very small numbers, insufficient to stimulate growth across the economy.

Furthermore, any lending to big companies in Greece isn’t being matched by loans to small companies or households. Borrowing costs for small- and medium-sized enterprises in Greece remain far higher than for those in the other peripheral countries, let alone in Germany or France. According to the Greek central bank, credit to the private sector continued tocontract in March, the latest month for which there are data.

And then there is this in a New York Times article about Greece.

With the country heading into the fifth year of economic depression, and unemployment near 60 percent for young people, greater numbers of women and men are offering their bodies for next to nothing to get any scrap of money. According to the National Center for Social Research, the number of people selling sex has surged 150 percent in the last two years.

And when hedge fund managers were asked about that aspect of the Greek recovery, or lack thereof their response was “we don’t care, we don’t see how we can make any money off of that.  We're not pimps, you know, we are actually not that moral.”

Eventually the Greek economy will recover.  The country has been around for a long time and is pretty hard to kill off.  So in five or ten years or however long it takes austerity supporters will claim to be vindicated.  And the ruin of millions of lives, hey, just part of the cost of doing business.

Short Comments – Because There Are Just Too Many Things to Be Irate About to Have Long Comments

Spreading the Outrage to Maximize It

It is hard to view current events in economics and politics (the theme of this Forum) without wondering if the world has been struck by a stupid bomb.  Don’t dismiss that without considering the following.

1. Everyone is excited that a Senate committee has passed an immigration bill.  The bill is terribly onerous, and is a political excuse for Democrats and some Republicans to say they support Hispanics.  A bill that has citizenship will likely die in the House, because Republican members are gerrymandered into districts where they do not have to worry about re-election.  For some reason the national media doesn’t understand any of this, and regards Senate actin as progress.

2. Hedge funds are bullish on Greek debt, not because they think the country isn’t a basket case, but because they think the European Central Bank will not let the bonds go into default.    In many circles, but in Greece where the horror of economic deprivation is real,  this is mistaken for progress in Greece.

3. The Boy Scouts look like they are going to admit openly gay scouts, but deny letting adult gay men participate as leaders.  It is hard to keep from disliking the Scouts for their prejudice against the gay community since they covered up various abuses by heterosexual leaders for decades.

4. A new survey finds that while 42% of Americans find the IRS to be a poor job, 27% rate the agency as excellent and 29% say it is doing a fair job.  The American public apparently understands that the agency is doing the best it can, the Cincinnati debacle notwithstanding.  Conservatives have vowed to redouble their efforts to demonize all government employees, and will soon debut a campaign that alleges IRS workers are blood sucking zombies. [Was famous Democrat Dracula a Zombie?  We report  you decide?]

5. Sears is losing even more money this year than it lost last year from its operations.  The business model of offering the same things as everyone else, but at higher prices does not seem to attract new customers.

6. Forecasters say this year’s hurricane season will have more and stronger hurricanes than last year.  This is the CYA method of predictions, because if it is bad then they forecasters will say “I told you so” and if it is mild no one will be upset or mad that the forecasters were wrong.  The truth, no one knows or can predict the severity of the hurricane season.  There, we said it.

7. How much does a person have to give the University of Virginia in order to address students and say stupid, ignorant and prejudicial remarks?  Apparently $100 million will do it, as  billionaire hedge fund manager Paul Tudor Jones has given that amount and then recently told students that women will never be successful securities’ traders because they have children.  We are not sure if Mr. Jones gained his stupidity after he amassed a billion dollar fortune or if he was born with it.  The difficulty in making that determination here is that gross stupidity and lack of even basic decency is not an impediment to making a billion or two in finance.

8. Golfer Sergio Garcia, in his open feud with golfer Tiger Woods has done what many people thought was impossible, he has made Mr. Woods the more likeable of the two.  Mr. Garcia made openly vicious racist comments about Mr. Woods, and as everyone knows, those types of comments come out because they are deeply felt and have been held a long time.  Mr. Woods is one of the most unpleasant athletes in any sport, but he looks like a gentleman compared to Mr. Garcia.

9. It has been revealed that a Republican Congressman from Tennessee who supports a massive cut to the food stamp program has received millions from government programs that subsidize agriculture.  Stephen Fincher would not comment on the report, but probably feels that if the government has to choose between himself and hungry children, well then      hungry children just need to realize that government can’t help everybody.

10. No one seems to notice or care that the practices that allowed Apple Computer to escape up to $40 billion in taxes are the practices that the Republicans would make permanent in their plans to make corporate income taxes territorial.  Under their plan corporations would pay taxes where the money was earned.  Apple and other tech companies have easy methods to shift the locus of income to low tax jurisdictions.  So Republicans apparently support what Apple has done, and want others to do it also.

Illinois State Senate Approves Medical Marijuana Use – And It Looks Like The Did It the Right Way

The Wrong Way – A Backdoor to Legalization

America needs to be using less drugs, not more.  The American public’s demand for illegal narcotics has nearly destroyed law and order in Mexico.  And many states are using a legitimate use of marijuana as a way to legalize the drug.  But Illinois may show that the benefits of medical marijuana can be made available to those who need it, without providing easy access to the rest of the public.

Illinois state Sen. William Haine is congratulated after his bill to legalize medical marijuana passes through the Senate. (Seth Perlman / Associated Press / May 17, 2013)

If it becomes law, the Illinois bill will prohibit patients from growing their own pot; instead, plants will be raised at “grow centers” overseen by authorities and the state Department of Agriculture.

Only doctors that have established relationships with patients will be able to dispense the drug to help with pain or side effects associated with treating serious illnesses, such as AIDS or cancer.

“It can’t be consumed in public. It can’t be displayed in public,” Haine said.

The bill would allow medical marijuana use for just four years, essentially creating a pilot program on the drug's use. If it’s not renewed by the state’s General Assembly, the medical pot effort will die.

This sounds reasonable.  And the opposition to widespread use here is not based on a nanny state goal.  It is based on driving.  Alcohol and electronic device usage are major killers and maimers on American roads.  The U. S. does not need thousands of vehicle deaths and injuries from legalized drug use.

Radical Conservative Congressman Darrell Issa Wants to Force Testimony From Lois Lerner in IRS Investigation

“We Have Ways of Making You Talk” He Did Not Say

Conservatives Profess Love of Liberty – And Want to Take It Away

We admit we were confused when it was reported that Lois Lerner, who is involved in the IRS sortof scandal decided to invoke the fifth amendment against self- incrimination in a House hearing.  The occasion was a hearing held by the Grand Inquisitor of the Congress, Darrell Issa, a man who must adore Torquemada and fervently wish that he, Mr. Issa could torture people and make them confess.

Lerner shocked the committee room in the opening moments of Wednesday’s hearing by delivering an opening statement denying any wrongdoing and professing pride in her government service.

“I have not done anything wrong,” said Lerner, who triggered the IRS scandal on May 10 by acknowledging that the agency had singled out conservative groups applying for tax exemptions. “I have not broken any laws. I have not violated any IRS rules or regulations, and I have not provided false information to this or any other committee.”

Beyond that, she refused to answer the committee’s questions, immediately triggering a debate among panel members over whether she had just voided her Fifth Amendment rights.

Now as we understand the fifth amendment is used in criminal cases, but why it should be necessary to invoke it before a Congressional Committee is something we don’t understand.  Every American should have the right to simply say to Congress “No, I do not have to answer your questions and I will not answer your questions.  You have no right, unless I consent, to ask me questions.”

See that’s what freedom is all about, that the Congress cannot question you and expect answers if you don’t want to answer.  So once again we have Conservatives who ardently love freedom working to deny it to people.  Not new or unexpected, just sad.

Now we do understand that if a person is called before a grand jury and starts to answer questions instead of remaining silent than that person has waived their right to remain silent.  But Congress is not a grand jury, in fact if one is a strict constructionist like Republicans claim to be, it is hard if not impossible to find where the Constitution gives the Congress the right to compel testimony.

Hey Conservatives - Here It Is

A question is now out there as to whether or not Ms. Lerner lost her right to remain silent by making an opening statement.  The answer of course is no, these are inalienable rights, just check the Declaration of Independence, something Republicans apparently read but do not understand.

Of course the bigger question here is why is Ms. Lerner still in her job?

[Update:  She has been placed on temporary leave, something everyone hopes will soon be made permanent.]

Here’s What to Do If You are a Disgraced Public Official or Public Person

Go Teach at a College or University – For Some Reason They Want You

The men and women who betray the public trust, or act so egregiously  in public that they are no longer wanted in public usually have a pretty easy life.  Most of them are either very wealthy (Eliot Spitzer) or well off and while they have to live with public disgrace of their own making, they usually are not living a life of suffering or penury.

And now it turns out that many of them end up teaching at colleges and universities.  Huh?  For some this seems appropriate, like former Judge Sol Wachter who is now apparently a very good law professor.

Two decades ago, Sol Wachtler, the former chief judge of New York State, was forced from public service and sentenced to 15 months in prison amid erratic and menacing behavior toward his ex-lover and her daughter that he later attributed to prescription drugs and manic depression. After his release, he began teaching at Touro College’s law school, now in Central Islip, N.Y. He has by all accounts taken the job very seriously, winning the title of “distinguished adjunct professor” and serving on the university’s board of governors.

But others, like former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, the question would seem to be what the heck is going on here.

One of his students, Melissa Lynch, said he was one of her best teachers and he encouraged the class to call him on his cellphone if they had questions about readings. When it came to the mechanics of running a class, however, “he didn’t really seem to know what he was doing.” The class required one writing assignment, “but he didn’t know if it should be 2 pages or 30 pages,” she said, adding, “He kept asking us, ‘What do other professors do?’ ”

Ms. Lynch recalled classroom discussions as intense and wide-ranging — with limits. “He would never let us get to a point, obviously, where we were going to address him stepping down,” she said.

And in some cases the selection by a college seems just totally inappropriate.

More recently, Parsons the New School for Design announced that John Galliano, the celebrated clothing designer who lost his job at Christian Dior after unleashing a torrent of anti-Semitic vitriol in a bar, would be leading a four-day workshop and discussion called “Show Me Emotion.”

Well if by ‘emotion’ Parsons means hatred of Jews it would seem there are just a number of people to choose from.  And certainly some excellent texts, such as Mein Kampf.

The case of David Petraeus is more complex.

And David H. Petraeus, the general turned intelligence chief turned ribald punch line, will have not one college paycheck, but two. Last month, the City University of New York said he would be the next visiting professor of public policy at Macaulay Honors College. On Thursday, the University of Southern California announced that Mr. Petraeus would also be teaching there; he will split his time between coasts.

in part because of this.

Mr. Petraeus, who has a Ph.D. from Princeton and has taught and written extensively, entertained inquiries from many universities, his lawyer said. When he was director of the Central Intelligence Agency, however, before the world found out about his extramarital affair with his biographer, he was mentioned as a possible president of Princeton, not as a professor at CUNY or U.S.C.

So in the spirit of the season, Spring, we will allow Mr. Petraeus to do his thing without criticism, because his credentials and experience seem to outweigh his discretions.  For the rest of them we would say that yes, you had your opportunity, you blew and now please just go.

Charles Wolf, Jr. Holds A Distinguished Chair in Economics and Apparently Knows Nothing About Contemporary Economics

How Can This Be?  - Oh, He’s a Conservative

Now that the austerians, those policy makers who think that economic expansion can be created by economic contraction have been thoroughly routed by the real world, they are  trying to find excuses for their failure and to say that the other side, the successful Keynesian side was not successful.  Charles Wolf Jr, writing in the Wall Street Journal based on his credentials as a Distinguished Professor in International Economics is one of these folks.

But at the beginning Mr. Wolf says this,

Why is it that in the United States the "stimulus" solution to the economy's ills has performed badly while in Europe the opposite approach, "austerity," has performed even worse?

The answer is that austerity (defined as substantial reductions in debt-financed government spending) or stimulus (defined as high-levels of debt-financed government spending) will promote growth only in some countries and in some circumstances.

Wow, in two short paragraphs we have three fallacies.

1. Austerity is defined as a reduction in government spending AND an increase in taxes.  Mr. Wolf doesn’t even know what he is talking about.

2. The Stimulus in the United States has performed well, just not great.  When it was implemented the economy grew rapidly, and when it stopped the growth slowed.  But the U. S. economy has had continual growth and the lack of a great results comes from the fact that the Stimulus was insufficient and ill designed.

3. Austerity will not promote growth in some countries, at least it has not to date.  In every country that it has been implemented it has resulted in a total lack of growth.  Really, Mr. Wolf, you can look it up.  In fact you can look it up in the Wall Street Journal! (the news section, not the editorial fiction section.)

And then look at this statement by Mr. Wolf explaining why austerity might not work

Austerity adherents claim that its dismal record simply reflects that it was too severe and imposed too quickly.

Really, what he is saying that austerity works, but not too much and not too soon.  So this means he thinks austerity should only be lightly applied and only after a stimulus program has restored economic growth.  In the real world this is known as Keynesian economics.

So what are his reasons for thinking a stimulus does not work.  Well there is this

One is what textbooks refer to as "Ricardian equivalence"—that debt-financed government spending in the present may require higher taxes in the future, thereby motivating companies and households to save rather than invest or spend.

Of course he provides no data or support of any kind that any business or individual has withheld spending for the reason that taxes might, just might go up in the future.  And of course this is because no one knows of such an instance.  Can one imagine a business leader saying “well we have a great investment opportunity here but you know, taxes might go up in five or ten years so let’s just hold our money in cash that earn .5%.”  Really, does anyone other than an ivory tower, out of touch academician think this way?  

And finally there is this explanation of why the Stimulus did not do great things.

Other indicators are increased household savings rates (by 3%-4% annually) since 2009, and decreased household debt (by 8%), thus further negating the increased aggregate demand sought by stimulus.

Yes, this is right, but it is exactly why government spending as stimulus had to take place and why it needed to be higher and better directed.  It had to replace lower private spending until that private spending was revived.  In other words, what Mr. Wolf is claiming as a problem with expansionary policy is exactly its rationale.

All of this leaves us with one unanswered question, which is how does someone this ignorant of basic economics get to be a Distinguished Professor?

There is a Huge Battle Over Control of Dell

Can Anyone Tell Us Why?

Michael Dell built the company named after him into a personal computer Goliath.  Now Mr. Dell wants to take the company private, to buy out the shareholders leaving himself and some partners as owners.  The shareholders are not happy, thinking that Mr. Dell is dealing himself a great deal at their expense.

Icahn and a major stakeholder, Southeastern Asset Management, say Michael Dell’s deal is too cheap for a company trying to challenge I.B.M. and Hewlett-Packard in enterprise computing. They are proposing new leadership and additional cash or stock for shareholders.

Not so fast.  A major part of Dell’s business is personal computers, you know, the ones nobody is buying any more.

Dell, the subject of a takeover battle between the activist investor Carl Icahn and the company’s billionaire founder, reported a 79 percent slide in profit as personal computer sales continued to shrink.

Now let’s see what is happening here.  Michael Dell is in the process of running the company into the ground.  The company is in a dying industry, PC’s.  Michael Dell wants to take complete control of the company, presumably so he can finish the job of running it into the ground.  So why

1. Do the existing shareholders want to hang on?

And

2. Why do Mr. Dell’s partners want to put up billions so he can have even more control of the company he is failing?

Imponderables both.

Can It Get Any Worse for Democrats or the Rest of Us – John Edwards is Getting Back Into the Public Eye

He Is Speaking to a Group – But Why Would Anybody Want to be in the Same Room with the Man?

The good guys and gals all seem to leave the stage much too early.  The disgusting ones all seem to want to stick around.  Newt Gingrich won’t go, Rick Santorum is hovering in the wings looking for the right spot to spew prejudice and Michele Bachmann is starting her re-election campaign, because when you are as bad an office holder as she is, you cannot start a campaign for re-election too soon.

Now it turns out John Edwards, former VP nominee, former Presidential candidate and all around awful person is coming out from wherever he has been hiding and entering the public arena.

RALEIGH, N.C. — Former presidential contender John Edwards has reactivated his license to practice law and is setting out on the speaking circuit.

The two-time presidential candidate and former North Carolina senator is scheduled to appear June 6 at a private retreat in Orlando, Fla., for lawyer clients of the marketing firm PMP.

But there is this rare bit of good news, good news being in short supply these days.

Messages left at PMP seeking comment about the firm’s booking of Edwards received no response. A woman who answered the phone said the June event would be closed to the media.

Please PMP, please, keep it closed.  Don't make us even know that what Mr. Edwards said is out there.

Gosh, Mr. Edwards was a noted trial lawyer.  One imagines that now in Court he would start the trial with something like this.

“John Edwards for the plaintiff, members of the jury please try not to throw up.”

Yeah, we can see that speech happening.

Outrage that a Judge in Texas Says a Gay Couple Cannot Live Together? – Not So Fast

Maybe Outrage is Required, Maybe Not – Details Matter

When this Forum saw this headline in the on-line issue of the Washington Post

Texas judge says lesbian couple can’t cohabitate, cites morality clause in divorce papers

it seemed a perfect time to excoriate the ugly prejudice of Texans against gay and lesbian couples.  After all, it took a Supreme Court decision to take away the power of Texas to jail gay and lesbian couples for the crime of being gay and lesbian couples.

But The Dismal Political Economist is nothing if not diligent, and so unlike many others who jump to conclusions, he actually read the story for the details.  It turns out this is probably not anti-gay bias.

A judge has ruled that a North Texas lesbian couple can’t live together because of a morality clause in one of the women’s divorce papers.

The clause is common in divorce cases in Texas and other states. It prevents a divorced parent from having a romantic partner spend the night while children are in the home. 

As the article ultimately points out, the clause is intended to single out gay couples.

Roach said the clause doesn’t target same-sex couples, adding that the language is gender neutral.

“It’s a general provision for the benefit of the children,” the judge said.

Now it is true that such a decree from a judge as part of a divorce settlement may be Unconstitutional because where does it say that government should be the judge of the morality on legal behavior,  and because gays cannot get married in Texas (non gay couples can get around the provision by getting married) the onus may fall unequally on gay couples.

But this does not appear to be gay bias, and the only bias here may be in the headline in the Washington Post, which is misleading and inflammatory.  But then the Post mostly gave up on responsible journalism years ago.

Response to Reader – And Clarification on IRS Role in Approving Application For Tax Exempt Status Under 501( c)(4)

And Maybe It is Time to Simply Allow Political Groups Tax Exempt Status

[Editor's note:  Source material for this Post is from various tax code sections, Form 1024 and its instructions and, most importantly, a letter from IRS official Steven T. Miller to Senator Orrin Hatch, April 26, 2012 (link unavailable but can be found by searching the Net) in which Mr. Miller sets out in detail how the IRS investigates applications for tax exempt status under Sec. 501(c)(4).]

A regular visitor to this site has raised some very interesting questions about our Post on the IRS affair, and he (and the rest of the readers) deserve a response.  The comment in its entirety was this.

I can't agree with you about all of this. The IRS asked some group for donor lists. It might not have "forced" any group to reveal its donors, but a request from the IRS carries implicit force and should not be made if the requested information is protected from disclosure. This is especially true when answers must be provided under penalty of perjury, as I believe the IRS requested. The IRS also asked questions about the groups' views and requested documentation of their activities. Now here things get murkier for me, as I don't know what sort of showing must be made to achieve 501(c)(4) status. It might be that these kinds of requests are acceptable, even proper, in a 501(c)(4) inquiry - after all, tax-exempt status is quite a benefit and should not be afforded to groups not meeting the criteria. So putting aside the donor list and disparate treatment issues, the dispute I don't understand is whether it was ok for the IRS to request extensive non-donor list information from on

Good points.  First of all with respect to being tax exempt under Sec. 501(c)(4), IRS approval or review is not needed. A group can simply ‘self declare’ that they are tax exempt, and as long as they follow the rules and the IRS does not successfully challenge them, they remain tax exempt. 

So why do groups file an application with the IRS?  Simple, they want the assurance that goes with the IRS granting tax exempt status.  But once an application is filed the IRS has an obligation to investigate to see if tax exempt status is allowed.  This is what happened in the Cincinnati affair.

As for the issue of disclosing donors, the IRS has, or at least believes it has, the authority to ask for donor information as part of its investigation.  What it does not have is the authority to release donor information on a regular basis as part of the tax return filing, form 990.  Notice that these two areas are separate.  Asking for donor information as part of the process of approving a Form 1024 application appears to be legitimate and no organization that has voluntarily filed a Form 1024 should be surprised if the IRS asks for donor information and other information.

As for disclosure of information in the process of approving tax exempt status, that policy is proscribed by statute, not IRS discretionary policy.  And all of this has been in place and documented for decades.  All of this is known by anyone who practices in this field.  Nothing is new here other than the practice of the IRS (wrongly so) of concentrating on conservative groups.

So to answer the questions from the comment, is it ok for the IRS to request both donor and non-donor information, that answer is an emphatic YES.  That is the purpose of filing the form and subjecting the organization to IRS scrutiny, it is to make the IRS comfortable so that tax exempt status is not in question.  It would not be acceptable or legal for the IRS to require or release donor information on an ongoing basis as part of an annual return. But it would not be acceptable, legal or even logical that the IRS should  approve tax exempt status without an investigation.  Otherwise what's the point?

So what we have here are conservative groups that applied for tax exempt status under Sec. 501(c)(4) and asked to be investigated by the IRS, even though they were not required to do so, and then are outraged and furious that they were investigated by the IRS.  Huh?

The great wrong here was not the process of investigation that the IRS used.  That seems to be perfectly legal and acceptable and standard practice.  The wrong was singling out suspected conservative groups for special attention.  Even worse than wrong, it was grossly stupid.  And the result, conservative groups will be even less investigated for violating tax exempt status than they were before.

Finally, it may be time to scrap the non-election related requirement for obtaining Sec. 503(c)(4) status.  As long as a group is not a profit making firm masquerading as a tax exempt entity then it should be a tax exempt entity.  Anyway, that is the result of all of this.

Try To Reconcile John Donne Poem With the Suicide of French Historian Dominique Venner

John Donne Never Met Mr. Venner

Here is the poem about mankind and death by John Donne, a poem where a few of the lines have gained immortality

No Man Is An Island

No man is an island,
Entire of itself.
Each is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manor of thine own
Or of thine friend's were.
Each man's death diminishes me,
For I am involved in mankind.
Therefore, send not to know
For whom the bell tolls,
It tolls for thee. 

John Donne

And here is news about the suicide of a French historian in the Cathedral de Notre Dame in Paris.

 

A far-right French historian shot himself in the head beside the altar of Notre Dame cathedral in Paris . . .

Mr Venner, a presenter on a Catholic-traditionalust radio station and controversial historian and essayist,  posted an essay on his website earlier in the day calling for "new, spectacular and symbolic actions to shake us out of our sleep, to jolt anaesthetised minds and to reawaken memory of our origins".

Mr. Donne says we are supposed to be diminished by the death of Mr. Venner and that the bell that tolls his death tolls for us.  But consider this ask yourself if you are really diminished here.

Much of his work has been steeped in the racist ideology of the far-right, apologising for the pro-Hitler regime in Vichy in the Second World war and warning of conspiracies to destroy European civilisation and to swamp the white race.

 Mr Venner was also an expert, and the author of several books, on hunting and fire-arms. In the 1960s, he was a member of the Organisation de l'Armée Secrète - the extreme nationalist terrorist movement which opposed the French withdrawal from Algeria and attempted several times to assassinate President Charles de Gaulle.

Well, we will try to be diminished,  but no guarantees.  And it doesn't seem that in this case that the bell tolls for thee.

Even After Tragedy of Fire and Death in Texas, State Rejects Regulation

What’s A Few Lives (Someone Else's Of Course) Compared to Principles

The lack of effective regulation was clearly a factor in the horrendous explosion in West, Texas, an industrial accident that killed people and destroyed a town.  But in Texas no amount of death and destruction will cause the citizens to turn away from their hatred of effective government regulation, regulation that prevents devastation such as the tragedy in West.

Adrees Latif/Reuters

The explosion in April of a fertilizer plant near West, Tex., was so powerful that it registered as a 2.1-magnitude earthquake. McLennan, the county that includes West, has no fire code.

Even in West, last month’s devastating blast did little to shake local skepticism of government regulations. Tommy Muska, the mayor, echoed Governor Perry in the view that tougher zoning or fire safety rules would not have saved his town. “Monday morning quarterbacking,” he said.

Raymond J. Snokhous, a retired lawyer in West who lost two cousins — brothers who were volunteer firefighters — in the explosion, said, “There has been nobody saying anything about more regulations.”

Texas has always prided itself on its free-market posture. It is the only state that does not require companies to contribute to workers’ compensation coverage. It boasts the largest city in the country, Houston, with no zoning laws. It does not have a state fire code, and it prohibits smaller counties from having such codes. Some Texas counties even cite the lack of local fire codes as a reason for companies to move there.

So yes Texas is a great business success, and the people whose lives are damaged or destroyed, well that’s a small price to pay for creating the kind of business climate where companies move to a location because they don’t have a fire code.

Putting the IRS Scandal in Perspective – No One’s Freedom Was Compromised – No One’s Taxes Were Compromised

A Scandal Only of Management and Political Insensitivity

The Republican hysteria over the targeting of Conservatives groups by the IRS in their pursuit of verification of granting tax exempt status of political advocacy groups grows every minute.  One wonders if the city of Washington or the state of Texas are big enough to contain the phony outrage.

Louisiana Governor and Presidential wannabe Bobby Jindal has shrieked that people should go to jail for taking away the freedom of others.  And professional Obama haters like Charles Krauthamer and Peggy Noonan can barely contain their spew.  So it’s time to put the whole issue in perspective and do what the mainstream media has not done and will not do, examine the issues.

A section of the tax code, section 501(c)4 provides that groups that are formed to promote public welfare are exempt from paying income taxes.  Unlike 501(c)3 organizations, donor may not deduct their contributions from their income taxes.  Two very important points in the story are (1) the 501 (c) 4 groups do not need to disclose their donors and they are not allowed to engage in partisan political activity.

The IRS office in Cincinnati is charged with investigation and approving application for tax exempt status.  For reasons known only to the idiots in that office, they set up a criteria for special attention and investigation for conservative groups.  As a result approval of tax exempt status was delayed for many of these organizations.  And that’s it.

No organization was denied tax exempt status.  No organization had to pay taxes.  No organization was forced to reveal its donors.  No one in the organization and no donors were singled out for examination of their personal taxes.  No one was denied the right to campaign or support candidates of their choice.  Nothing much happened.

The reason this is not Nixonian is that Nixonian abuses were aimed at individuals.  Individuals were persecuted and the direction to persecute individuals came from the White House which saw the IRS as a way to attack its political enemies.

So this scandal simply exposes the managerial incompetence of the Obama administration, and the administration’s total lack of understanding the politics of the issue.  In the end Conservatives and corruption of money in politics has won.  Even if conservative political groups blatantly violate the law they now have immunity.  That, not the political hysteria of the right is the lasting legacy of this idiocy.

Minnesota Illustrates That About the Only Way to Defeat Conservatives is to Let Them Win

Huh –

The American voting public is not particularly liberal.  The nation could be described as slightly right of center, particularly on fiscal issues of government spending.  Conservatives with their message of individual freedom, lower government regulation, let people alone, lower taxes and the like have a better story to tell, and they tell it well.  In fact, were they to actually live up to that philosophy in total they would be the permanent majority party.  On paper it's a good story.

But in practice conservatives do not live up to their ideals.  So about the only way to defeat them is to demonstrate their hypocrisy to the American voters, and about the only way to do this, absent tens of millions of dollars for campaigns to educate voters, is to let them win, let them govern and then let the public vote them out when they see what is really going on.

Such is the case in Minnesota.  Two years ago the Republicans controlled the state legislature, and shut down state government rather than allow taxes to increase on the very wealthy.  They also thought they would cement their power with a big vote banning marriage equality.

Just two years ago opponents seized a surprise opportunity to try to permanently ban it in Minnesota.

After winning unprecedented control of both chambers in the Legislature, Republicans decided to ask voters to approve a constitutional amendment that would permanently make same-sex marriage illegal.

The amendment touched off the most ferocious battle of the 2012 elections in the state, galvanizing activists on both sides and drawing millions of dollars in campaign spending.

But the nation has changed, changed faster than conservatives realized.

In a stunning defeat, Minnesota voters rejected the measure, the first to do so among the 31 states that have voted on the question.

When it was over, gay marriage remained illegal. Unwilling to waste momentum, Minnesotans United for All Families, the lead group pushing for same-sex marriage, moved quickly to hire a dozen seasoned lobbyists to press its case at the Capitol, including several with deep Republican ties.

The great result, two years after Republicans thought they could ban marriage equality in the state Constitution, Minnesota  made marriage equality the law of the state.  So yes, once voters realize what they got when they voted in Republicans, once they realize they did not get what they thought conservatives stood for, out they go.  Are you listening North Carolina, Florida, Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio and Pennsylvania?

Yes, the Jackals Are Circling Mr. Obama – But It Wouldn’t Be So Bad If

He Had Not Invited Them

The glee in the writings of Conservatives over the travails of the Obama Administration are starting to overwhelm the media.  Here is the former Romney viaduct to the Washington Post, Jennifer Rubin.

The buck stops here, the fish rots from the head

By Jennifer Rubin, 

And of course George Will can always be counted upon to gloat and pontificate

George F. Will

Opinion Writer

Obama’s tapped-out trust

By George F. Will, E-mail the writer

And the Wall Street Journal editorial pages are positively giddy, like pre-teens catching a glimpse of a music idol, (an appropriate methphor as they have the intellectually capacity of a pre-teen).

But the President’s critics are not limited to the right wing crazies.  His supporters are also disappointed, and many are furious.  And they have a right to both of those emotions.  The President appears to have learned absolutely no political skills in his first term, and his interest in the ways and means of government approaches the equivalent in political science of absolute zero in the physical sciences. 

And it’s not just that he does not have any interest in the management of the Federal government, he also appears to have no interest in appointing people who do.  And so the position here is okay Mr. Obama, this is your problem, you fix it.  Yeah, we know you will not face the voters, but your party will in less than two years, and you know, it would be nice to keep Ted Cruz from being a Committee Chairman.

Exhibit A on Why American Business Management is Lacking

How Long For Burger King to Copy the McRib Sandwich?

Anyone, which is to say everyone who has contact with any major American business or governmental institution comes away with the feeling that most of these organizations are run by  idiots.  How else to explain the experience of flying on an U. S. carrier, or of trying to get a driver’s license renewed, or the filing of an insurance claim.

If anyone needs any more evidence, here is the story of what Burger King is going to offer the American palate this summer.

Burger King on Thursday will unveil its 2013 summer menu plans, highlighted by a new, limited-time BK Rib Sandwich, which is boneless like McRib — has a tangy sauce and comes with sweet bread and butter pickles. It will be sold nationally beginning May 21.

Ok, we all know that the only thing ‘Rib’ like in these sandwiches is the name.  These are essentially ground pork, spices and some sickening sweet sauce, with pickle and onion on a roll.

 Not the work of genius.

But here is the really amazing part of the story.

The rib sandwich, which has been 10 months in the making . . .

Really, ten months to devise a sandwich that is only a copy of another sandwich.  What were those people doing for ten months?  Here are some guesses

Developed a research team to decide if the pickles should go on the top or bottom.

Had to settle argument over whether to use real pork or ‘pork like product.

Examined 172 different pork ribs to get the pressed rib shape right.

Needed the CEO to nix the proposed name of ‘McRipOff’ Sandwich.

Had to reformulate sauce when 16 people in marketing test instantly got

Type 2 Diabetes after eating one sandwich.

Were going to use Porky Pig as the spokesperson for the sandwich until someone noticed that Porky Pig was the sandwich.

Well, you can see the problems that caused the delay.

In North Carolina Republicans Race to the Bottom – The Bottom of the Trash Heap

Are They Playing a Game of “Be More Loathesome Than Other Person”?

This Forum has joined the national press in ridiculing North Carolina Republicans who have taken control of the state.  The Republicans want to limit damage from rising ocean levels by passing a low saying the oceans cannot rise above a certain level.  The want to introduce a state religion.  They want to take control from local government despite being in favor of giving control to local government.

Now a Republican has entered the contest for dumbest, most insensitive statement of the month, and is probably a finalist for dumbest, most insensitive statement of the year.  The context is that a state lawmaker was explaining why he was voting against regulation of 'puppy mills', regulation designed to insure that the animals were treated decently and humanely (obviously a ploy by international forces to take away American's freedom, freedom to abuse animals).

Quote of the Day

"''Daily exercise' - if I kick the dog across the room every day, is that considered daily exercise? Euthanasia performed humanely'- should I choose the ax or the baseball bat?"

-- North Carolina State Rep. Michael Speciale (R), quoted by WRAL-TV, arguing that care requirements in a bill to curb puppy mills were too ambiguous.

Yep, going to be hard to top that one.

Spain Records First Trade Surplus Since 1971 – Proving Once Again

If You Destroy the Ability to Buy Imports – Imports Will Fall

Spain is undergoing what economists term ‘internal devaluation’.  Because its currency is the Euro, it cannot gain competitiveness in the world economy by devaluing its exchange rate.  So the country is left with devaluing its people, driving down wages and creating massive unemployment.

This works, of course on the econmics (assuming you are willing to ignore the huge human suffering, which European leaders are willing to do.) For example, if you make it such that the populace has no income with which to buy imported goods, they will not buy imported goods (Insights like this are what made this Forum the expert it is today).  That is what has happened in Spain.

Spain posted its first monthly trade surplus on record in March as imports slumped, after government budget cuts undermined domestic demand.

The country’s trade balance in March swung to a surplus of 634.9 million euros ($818 million) from a deficit of 1.18 billion euros in February and 3.2 billion euros a year earlier, data released today by the Trade Ministry show. That is the first surplus since records began in 1971, Deputy Trade Minister Jaime Garcia-Legaz said at a press conference in Madrid.

The Spanish government of course hails this as some type of success story.

“Products made in Spain are replacing imports,” said Garcia-Legaz, who forecast the surplus will continue to grow. “That means products made in Spain are better and we are creating jobs inside Spain instead of outside Spain.”

And that creating jobs thing?  Well if you don’t look at Spain’s unemployment rate and growth in the number of people out of work, well maybe you can convince yourself that is true.  But in the real world . . . .

In Detroit a Bleak Report That May or May Not Be Too Pessimistic

But A Union Leader’s Comments Are Not Helpful

The city of Detroit is such a basket case that the state of Michigan essentially took over administration of the city, giving broad power to a ‘czar’ who was appointed to run things.  That czar has now issued his first report, and it is not a pretty picture.

In a report to be presented to Michigan’s treasurer on Monday, Kevyn D. Orr, the emergency manager appointed in March to take over operations here, described long-term obligations of at least $15 billion, unsustainable cash flow shortages and miserably low credit ratings that make it difficult to borrow.

And in the face of those fiscal troubles, Mr. Orr, a longtime bankruptcy lawyer, portrayed city operations in Detroit as in need of significant repair, including overhauls of the city’s Police Department and Fire Department, among others. . . .

But Mr. Orr’s findings, painfully detailing the city’s problems over more than 40 pages, also seem likely to become a new focal point for debate for some in Detroit who have questioned the seriousness of the city’s troubles and the need for state intervention at a level rarely seen for a city of its size.

Now no one should doubt that there is strong incentive for Mr. Orr to paints the most negative picture possible, because he is subject to criticism if things were actually worse, immune from criticism if things were actually better, and will have stronger support and lower expectations if he presents the situation he is inheriting as very, very bad.

In fact, a union leader has disagreed about the severity of the situation.

“It’s not as bad as what they’re trying to make it out to be,” Edward L. McNeil, a local official for the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, said on Sunday.

And he may be right and might have had some credibility, except for this.

Mr. McNeil had not viewed a copy of Mr. Orr’s report, which was not made public until late Sunday, but he said he had grown accustomed to overly negative assessments of Detroit by the state and its representatives.

Ok fine Mr. McNeil, disagree with the report if you want, but don’t you think you would have a little more support for your position if you, you know, had actually read the report and been able to rebut it on a factual basis.

Just a thought sir, we’d like to be on your side because we think part of what is going on here is a state Republican effort to punish and possibly destroy public employee unions, but we need some reasons to do so.  Telling us a report you have not read is wrong is wrong.

Laurene Powell Jobs – Widow of Steve – Apparently Doesn’t Know Her Place

Is Not Using Her Vast Inherited Fortune to Push Tax Cuts or Anti-Government Agenda

The death of Apple founder Steve Jobs has left his widow a very wealthy person.  She is now estimated to be the ninth wealthiest woman in the world, (although why these statistics should be divided by gender is a mystery).  So as a multi-billionaire doesn’t everyone expect her to use her vast fortune to rail against high taxes on wealthy people, and argue for electing a government that will let her and every other multi-billionaire gain even more money and escape the tyranny of a Federal government that limits people like her to only a few billions?

Maybe she is doing this, after all she has not set up a foundation and has not engaged in publically disclosed large donations.

Ms. Jobs - Actually wants to help people with her vast inherited fortune
What a traitor to her fellow billionaires

While some people said Ms. Powell Jobs should have started a foundation in Mr. Jobs’s name after his death, she did not, nor has she increased her public giving.

But no, Ms. Jobs seems to be the kind of person that apparently thinks she should actually help people with her time and money.  And she wants to do it quietly, in her own way.

she has redoubled her commitment to Emerson Collective, the organization she formed about a decade ago to make grants and investments in education initiatives and, more recently, other areas.

And she has done a lot without any publicity.

“It’s not about getting any public recognition for her giving, it’s to help touch and transform individual lives,” said Laura Arrillaga-Andreessen, a philanthropist and lecturer on philanthropy at Stanford who has been close friends with Ms. Powell Jobs for two decades. She is also the daughter of a wealthy real estate developer in Silicon Valley and the wife of Marc Andreessen, the venture capitalist.

“If you total up in your mind all of the philanthropic investments that Laurene has made that the public knows about,” she said, “that is probably a fraction of 1 percent of what she actually does, and that’s the most I can say.”

So great Ms. Jobs, go right ahead, do things the way you want to do them.  And thanks for not using your billions to fight government support for education, clean air and water, decent housing, good medical care and the like.  And the fact that this must infuriate people like the Koch Brothers and their ilk, well for us that’s just icing on the cake.