The Old Red Lady From the Old Gray Lady Essays Us on Economics and Other Things.

The Old Red Lady participates in the New York Times staff writings and, as usual, gives us a stilted look at world economics.[1] It is fashionable for the Times, aka the Walter Duranty Papers, to look askance at the  qualified economics of the Western persuasion, because, quite simply, that was the cause of the demise of Marxism, Leninism-Stalinism and other clabbered specimens of the far left ‘economics’ that led to the downfall of Marx’s theories. Marxist economics are  still considered a stale  joke in world commerce,  except for those who need excuses for grabbing other people’s money and wealth. That club is essentially limited to Africa, Cuba, North Korea, a few garden spots in South American, California and Massachusetts.

Today, in series #350, or so, of her ongoing and tautological screeds against the Republican political and economic successes since power were wrested from the lackeys of liberalism in 1993, our heroine lectures on economics. We now discover that foreigners are buying up the US. That is indeed news. We nervously await the solution to this puzzle from this article, but, the Old Red Lady [whose hair color matches her politics] misses her opportunity to inculcate us in any novel brand of economics that clarifies the notions of supply and demand in world markets. Economically forced markets and trade based on prices determined mutually by willing sellers and buyers flies in the face of proper Marxist economics and, as a matter of routine practice, is ignored at the Times, particularly by their Chief Non-Economist Paul Krugman.  Maureen is a small echo of Paul. The substitute for any reasonable discussion of trade is  always mired in the Marxist Muck defined by  leftist Tax Whoring [2] [3] [4] [5]  and signal oratory by their Chief Tax Hike Zombie. [6] We may only learn, for the 500^th time,  that tax hikes cures all social problems.

We know that foreigners are buying up property and stock from our citizens [strangely known as trade] and this could have been averted by the following sterling piece of logic:

“Maybe if the president had spent the trillion he squandered on his Iraq odyssey on energy research, we might have broken the oil addiction.”

Here, in a uncultivated voyage from the facts, the supply and demand problems are ignored. [7] If we had merely switched from cheap oil to other more exotic form of energy, very expensive now, and added those costs to our production of goods and services then we would still have very high energy prices.  We would also export fewer products.  That measure would have affected our balance of trade as the current situation has—only worse. The proper solution to all this energy supply was given way back in the 60s and 70s and was to simply explore and drill more wells as Castro is doing off Cuba and what the Mexicans have been doing for decades.  It is apparently okay for Communists to drill oil—but not us, even in the same waters. Since the oil supply curve is steep with respect to price, even a 5% drop in demand would slice off 20$ per barrel or more and force competition to even lower prices. But, the grand plan of the left is to prevent more drilling or building nuclear power plants at all costs and to cut down on oil consumption at a time when China and India are surging in production of all kinds of goodies. That is diffident logic and rates only the Lenin Prize for Stupidly as a reward. Following Lenin and his droolers properly trashed the economic societies of our enemies and he is to be commended for forcing such actions. We can all hug a Commie for this.[8]

We spent 5 trillion on welfare and other worthless social programs and how many poor people do we now have? About the same?? The same bromide is specified for ‘education’ where doubling the spending on more teachers and such has no effect on graduation rates and success in school. This is standard and stale liberal economics: Spend the money; the outcome is not important.  What is important is that the money be taken from the ‘rich’ and given to liberals to waste in any phony project they might conjure up. Recently obtained records from the Clinton Liebrary show that Hillary’s massive socialized medicine plan was outrageous. [9]

In a confidential memo from Jay Rockefeller obtained by Judicial Watch we read:

“[Jay]…criticizes the Task Force as a “secret cabal of Washington policy ‘wonks’” that has engaged in “choking off information” from the public regarding health care reform.  The memorandum suggests that Hillary Clinton “use classic opposition research” to attack those who were excluded by the Clinton Administration from Task Force deliberations and to “expose lifestyles, tactics and motives of lobbyists” in order to deflect criticism.  Senator Rockefeller also suggested news organizations “are anxious and willing to receive guidance [from the Clinton Administration] on how to time and shape their [news] coverage.”[10]

That worked for Dan Rather. [11]

Does this ring some bell for our Old Red Lady?? It should. We are going to have to admit that economic success for Americans is not acceptable to the left. They want to control everything and fluff like this sorry piece above is essentially proof. They have massive spending programs that are held secret lest the truth leak out and voters quash the glory.

The quest for cheap energy by the rabid left has fashioned such follies as Cold Fusion [12], the counterfeit Bluewater Wind platforms[13] that might generate electricity at $ 0.12 per Kwh, probably more,  while currently we get it form coal at $0 .03. Then there is the question of solar energy. The ugly facts here are that these ‘alternative’ forms of energy are very expensive and highly inefficient.  A trip to Home Depot in 2006 to look at solar power systems for an average house shows that they could supply, at best,  25% of the power consumed in the home, about $600 worth of electricity per year in Mid Atlantic terms.  But, this would cost $14,000 to install the solar collectors.  That modification requires a 25 year payback period, which does not include financing, which could push it to 40 years. Those kinds of economics make sense to the political hacks at the New York Times. “It’s for the children.” Let us all freak out and bawl about global warming.

The screed heats up with political blame. [What else from the Times?]

“Now it’s a race between Iraq, stupid, or the economy, stupid, to see which one will usher out W. “ [14]

A crude play on the Clinton slogan of the 90s.  We wonder when the Old Gray Lady will realize that Bush is not running again and has made huge mistakes that are being criticized by Republican candidates even now during the primary races? Bush’s blunders will be leading talking points for the Republicans in the months ahead. Illegal Immigration will head the list of hot topics that W refused to address, second only the economy. We are still at about 95% employment, which is considered full employment and is of record length for Bush’s terms since 1900.

This proclamation apparently allows us to suppose that the liberals have something else in mind that might ‘solve the energy problem’ and save us from the financial vultures across the pond. We could ask what that might be, since the left are not so forthcoming with detailed social and government spending plans. We do have Al Gore, who can save the planet from boiling our entrails with his phony Global Warming Follies.[15] This is interesting in that the left have no plans other than to merely tax, tax and  then tax our carbon usage while letting China, Africa  and India get a pass on world emission standards. If the US would suddenly drop its demand for oil then that would favor the third world in terms of production and distribution costs. So, we would be less competitive and would have to BUY MORE STUFF from the rest of the world and carbon dioxide levels would not change. They are not related to temperature changes anyway, but that is a separate matter. [16]

The Red Rant Ramps Up:

“The country is engaged in a fit of nativism and Lou Dobbsism, obsessing about the millions of Mexicans who might be sneaking across the border when billions in foreign money are pouring into Citigroup. You figure out what might be a bigger problem.”[17]

This is a very sore point with the left as the liberals desperately need the votes of illegal aliens to grunt and grab more political power. The Rule of Law here is properly ignored by the sordid left. Hillary has said recently that ‘women are not illegal.” Apparently, there are no illegal aliens who steal American’s documents and fail to file state and federal taxes who happen to be female. Lou Dobbs is a major factor in the growth of the independent party in the US, which has forced a lot of people to leave the Democrat party. Illegal immigration and energy policies are some of his strong arguing points and are aimed both at the left and the right. Lou is a grave threat to the left.

The Old Red Lady needs to press this point as it is a major factor in the upcoming election.

“The national boundaries that really matter are the financial ones: Who’s going to own the American economy?”[18]

Here, again, the oblique reference to borders. Why not have open borders so the ‘poor’ can flock to US and consume more oil and electricity? Europe does not have open borders. Nor, does North Korea, Cuba, and Africa.

Just as a suggestion, we might use the Mexican Solution to Debt [19] and say:

 Thank you so much [gringos] for investing in the US, but because of political reasons we must nationalize all your holdings and you have 48 hours to leave the country.

The debtor does hold  some strong political  positions as George Bernard Shaw told us as the reason England was able to get the Wilson Administration to support their side in World War 1: paraphrased as: “ if you don’t support us we cannot pay you. “[20]

We have a GDP of 17 trillion per year and a new wealth of about 300 trillion. The gringos are a few shekels short of owning a significant part of the US, but the left could change that. They could invite a hundred million aliens inside to vote for Hillary and get free money. That is, also, good politics and we should watch this.

That works. We could send a bill to Saudi Arabia to that effect as well.

rycK

Comments: ryckki@gmail.com