Recently in Economy Category

I know that some question my patriotism because I'm a slightly left-leaning liberal. I guess that's understandable. I complain about our government, and I have protested some. It's true that I was distrustful of our government when they got rid of habeas corpus, held people without trial and wanted to conduct secret trials. I do accuse our elected officials and bureaucrats of incompetence, mendacity and corruption. I share with my friends on the right all of these complaints, as well as a hearty distrust of government's motives, efficacy and honesty. Strangely, few seem to question the patriotism of critics who fire their potshots from the right.

Oh, and I don't wear a flag pin anymore. I did following 9-11, but this regime has trained me not to wear my love of country on either my sleeve or my lapel. Still, I am an American, love my country and therefore this week I took the president's words to heart and reluctantly followed orders, acceded to his request and did my duty.

Yes, despite the fact that there is nothing to watch on TV--except news, I took my wife's and my rebate check and bought a large flat screen Hi-Def digital TV. Mister President, I hope you're happy.

Instead of paying down long-term debt, I chose to do the right thing, my civic duty and give our shared economy the shot in its sagging butt that the president asked me to. I cannot live selfishly and must take into consideration not just my economic situation or desires but those of my fellow Americans. I understand that this economy depends on people spending money to buy things we don't need in order to keep people employed so they too can buy more things they don't need. After 9-11 the president said that the best thing for the American people to do to defeat the terrorists was to go shopping. Ok. If I'm now a Jonathan come lately to the cause, my wife, the Fair Helenkela, is a super patriot. She got the message, and was ready on day one. She has been spending us to prosperity.

I know that the Fed has been complaining that they bailed out a lot of financial institutions but too much of that money has gone to their reserves and not back into the economy. I know that the Feds are afraid that the people will also be stingy with the largess of our government, and we will save our money. Well, I'm here to tell you that I have joined a mighty throng in trying to set a good example and shaming those miserly banks, brokers and investment houses. No savings for me!

Now it's true that I don't understand how our system works. I'll just have to take it on faith that if we are broke as a nation, running huge deficits and borrowing money from China, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States (and by Gulf States, I do not mean Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas and Alabama), the best thing for all of us to do is spend money like drunken sailors. (Sorry about that, you sailors--drunk or sober. Make that "drunken congressmen"). I further can't quite grasp how buying things will really help my fellow Americans, few of whom actually make any of the things we are likely to buy.

Knowing little about economics, I can't figure out how buying TVs made in China, electronics from Korea, and cars from Japan, fueled by oil from Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States (still not Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas and Alabama) help with either our national or our personal debt.

But I'm tired of being a cynic, tired of being misunderstood as anti-American, so I'm joining in and doing my part. I'll spend till we are all economically in the pink. I'm now an optimist and filled with the audacity of hope.

The added benefit of my new-found patriotism is that I can now see on my 52 inch flat panel TV how bad BillO's complexion is, KeithO's heavy makeup and exactly how fake the CGI effects are when seen too closely. I know that true patriotism is not manifest in only one purchase. It is, like dieting, a way of life. Having climbed on the bandwagon, I'm in this for keeps. A big Hi-Def digital TV is worth little without theatre quality sound and a Blue-Ray DVD player. I'm on a path way beyond the amount of my refund and my rebate. But hey, this is the American way. Count on me to do my part. We all owe a great debt to this nation--just as this great nation owes a debt to China, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States. What we owe to our Gulf States of Louisiana. Mississippi, Texas and Alabama we have not begun to pay.

"We are in the throes of a recession," former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan said on a CNBC business news show yesterday. The anti-immigration activists must be dancing in the streets.

Why? Well they may be losing their own jobs, not to mention their 401(k) profits, houses and cars, but they can rest easy knowing it will mean fewer illegal immigrants to worry about driving without licenses, having babies, stealing their jobs picking strawberries or washing dishes. A weaker economy means Mexican and Central American migrant workers they revile so much (Canadian and European illegal immigrants not so much) won't be risking their lives to cross a border for non-existent jobs.

A story this week by the bastion of conservative thought, the Wall street Journal, reported that "apprehensions" by the border patrol have dropped sharply -- and indication that fewer people are slipping across the border. It also found that money transfers from the U.S. to Mexico and Central America are growing at much lower rates than it has in recent years.

But what's more telling is that while the U.S. is moving inexorably toward a recession, Mexico isn't. In this Reuters story out of Mexico Mexican officials chirp over their fortune.

Mexico's economy has yet to suffer a significant slowdown despite a feared recession in the United States, as industrial output and investment stay fairly healthy, the central bank governor said on Monday.

Experts warn that a drop in the U.S. economy will hurt Mexico more than others in Latin America, but Gov. Guillermo Ortiz, at the Reuters Latin America Investment Summit in Mexico City, said recent data suggested Mexico is in relatively good shape.

"So far this year, we haven't really felt an important slowdown in Mexican economic indicators," he said.

Ironically, by the time the border fence is finally finished we may no longer need it. Though, perhaps someday Mexico might put it to good use -- keeping Americans from sneaking across to find jobs in all the factories that relocated to Mexico in recent years.

No, I haven't gotten that check, but I did get the direct deposit of my whopping $10 federal tax refund!! (I had to pay the state.) Why, thank you Uncle Sam for rewarding my hard work so... shall I buy a roll of laundry quarters, or a gyro plate at Firehouse?

This is the time of year I start lusting for Steve Forbes again: Flat tax!! FLAT TAX!!! And as far as the black hole where my tax money goes... cut those useless wasteful programs!! Reduce spending!! Chop, chop, chop...

Why is it that if gas prices dropped by 25 percent, we would be dancing in the streets ... but when housing prices drop 25 percent, we prepare for the next Great Depression?

And a corollary: Why is that when gas prices rise by 25, 50, even 100 percent, we denounce big oil for price gouging ... but when housing prices similarly soar, we gladly sell our homes at "market value"?

What's worse than having to endure government flakery? Having to pay for it.

Like millions of Americans, I got a happy note in the mail from the IRS the other day. Who knew that could happen? it was the notice telling me that I was going to get a bribe, er rebate check in the mail shortly (though not in time enough to pay my tax bill next month). After the relief of not reading an audit notice, I started to get a little annoyed.Doesn't everyone whose head is not in the sand know there's a rebate? What exactly what was the point of this mailed note other than pure flakery? What's worse, this lRS letter campaign cost $42 million to mail.

The tax rebate was already a tremendously obvious PR stunt to momentarily make us forget that the Iraq war lumbers into its fifth year, gas prices are rising, the housing market is crumbling and so is the individual wealth of millions of working people, the nation's wealth is disproportionately going to the ultra rich, who are getting richer by laying off hardworking employees, and all our social safety nets have been rendered virtually worthless by decades of republicrats who have put the U.S. on the track toward third-world status. And the country has to finance this $169 billion economic package, of which these $600 bribes are part, making the final cost much, much larger. And this added, unnecessary cost of trying to spin the American people makes it offensive.

This is not to say I won't cash my check and spend it on some crap I don't need, and which was probably made in China or Mexico or Indonesia. I just wish that someone in DC would suddenly wake up and and say "hey, this is a bad idea. Let's stop the madness."

"I also ask you to work with me on another environmental first. I propose that California be the first in the world to develop a low carbon fuel standard that leads us away from fossil fuels."

That is, of course, the same governor who takes a private jet, almost daily, to and from Sacramento, burning more fossil fuels that a slew of normal commuters over the course of their lifetimes. So how does Arnold justify imposing tougher green burdens on the rest of us when he does so little to reduce his own massive carbon footprint? This is how he answered that question yesterday:

To me it's very important that I serve the people of California, but also at the same time that I serve my family. And so in order to do both I fly two or three times a week up here to Sacramento and fly back again so I can be at night with my family, can do the homework with the kids, can spend time with my wife and everything, which is extremely important. I promised that to them and I promised to the people of California I would take care of the job. And that's what I do. That's why I fly up to Sacramento and all over the state.

In other words, I've got my own good, personal reasons for releasing enough greenhouse gases to choke Al Gore.

Which, no doubt, is true. But here's the thing -- we all have our reasons.

I have good reasons for driving a big family car (a minivan) -- namely three kids (and a fourth on the way) whose state-mandated car seats wouldn't fit in a Prius. I've also got good reasons for a 90-mile round-trip commute -- namely, it's what I need to do to be able to afford a home where we can feel comfortable raising our children.

That's the point. Other than, oh, the occasional millionaire with a garage full of Hummers (not to single out anyone in particular, mind you), we all have good reasons for doing what we need to do to get around this crazy state. And Arnold's plan for higher fuel-efficiency standards on cars will impose a real hardship on middle-class families struggling to get by and get around. (Private jets, of course, are exempt from the higher fuel-efficiency standards.)

While I'm willing to make some sacrifices if the health of our planet depends on it, there's something infuriating about a governor calling on ordinary people who live on tight budgets to make such sacrifices when he's unwilling to make any himself. Like telecommuting, or saving some of that jet-fuel dough and buying his family a house in Sac'to. (And please don't tell me this "carbon offset" nonsense counts.)

Surely if Arnold thinks that saving the earth requires us to make some tough choices, he can lead by example.

How is it that we are debating NAFTA and the shipping of jobs overseas while at the same time letting Airbus win a $41 billion contract for tanker planes for our Air Force? This contract is likely grow to over $100 billion Euros over the next decade. This represents money that could be spent here, and workers who could be employed here. The fig leaf of Northrop having offices in the states and some assembly taking place here is just that—a fig leaf.

Instead of worrying about tech support in India and people sewing shirts in South Asia for pennies and hour—jobs not really injuring our citizens—why are we not demanding the return of aerospace industry to our shores? This is not simply about jobs, though this is certainly an important part, but about our ability to engage the world.

We know that we have problems when the oil spigot dries up. What about when the world disapproves of some American foreign policy initiative? Could our military be held hostage to French foreign policy objectives or by a vote of the European Union? If we outsource our military equipment, the answer becomes Yes.

Should we need spare parts, we can imagine ourselves, like Cuba, isolated and starved of the ability to keep our planes in the air. Yes, this is economic but it is also a matter of national security.

As we enter a recession with growing deficits and unemployment, as the world becomes less and less influenced by our wants and needs, this contract is madness itself—economically, for jobs, for the deficit, the balance of trade and for our security and freedom of movement in the world.

Today I got an email from DirecTV about monthly fees going up, as they periodically do, a few bucks. I was probably one of the very few who clicked on the link to check out the "new prices." (Notice how they avoid the words "rate" and "hike" and "gouge"?) Anyhow, this got me thinking that maybe it was time for a change. I've been a dish user for about five years now. So I thought I'd check around for other cable or dish packages. But I was quickly In every case, I checked the fine print and real costs and figured that there was just no way around it: I was bound to get soaked, no matter what I do.

Then Chris told me a story of how he got some Visa gift cards for Christmas which were defective and couldn't be used. After much wrangling with the company, they told him they would send him a check for the balance of the cards - for a $10 fee.

There is a point to all this, as it got me fuming about the nickel- and dime-ing that American consumers are subjected to by the various service companies -- phone, TV, internet providers, banks, credit card companies, etc. A "replacement" fee for this. A "transfer fee" here. A "service charge" there. And don't even get me started on all the fees in mortgage contracts.

Millions of dollars are collected every year from tiny increments, according to Bob Sullivan, the "Red Tape Chronicles" columnist and author of "Gotcha Capitalism" It's a book I'm reading in short doses as every few pages whip me up into an anti-corporate, John Edwards-like foam and I have to stop and have a cookie or a valium or backrub to fee normal.

The result is I'm starting to be a pro-active anti-fee agent. And you can help by telling me your worst fee story.

I need to play a number for the distraught merchants along Rodeo Drive and other chi-chi shopping corridors, who face a new crisis in high-end retail: They're no longer able to tell which potential customers are rich. From the Wall Street Journal's Wealth Report:

I was talking to a Jaguar salesman last week and asked him what the hardest part of his job was.

“You can’t tell who’s rich anymore,” he said. “It used to be if someone walked in with jeans and a T-shirt I could ignore them or ask them to leave. Now that guy could be a billionaire. You have to be nice to everybody these days.”..

Identifying the rich used to be fairly simple: They dressed, talked and looked a certain way. They had iconic last names like Hutton or Hearst or Phipps, often with Roman numerals at the end.

Today, wealth has been democratized and individualized, and the rich come in all ages, shapes, sizes and ethnicities. People often ask me, “What do the rich wear? How can you tell by looking at someone today if they’re rich?” Such questioners are usually recalling old myths about watches and shoes, but my answer is that there is no way to tell. The rich don’t have a uniform anymore. Today, they all wear their wealth differently, from the dot-commers in T-shirts to the hedge-funders in khaki to the CEOs in classic pinstripes.

Oh, the indignity! The merchants now have to be ... "nice to everybody!" Capitalism can be so cruel.

(H/T Benjamin Kepple's Daily Rant.)

MarketWatch has surveyed 50 major American cities, and come up with two Top 10 lists --- most business friendly, and least. Los Angeles, as you might have guessed, made the anti-business list. Here's MarketWatch's description of our fair town, complete with a great quote from Jack Kyser that I've put in bold for everyone's enjoyment:

45. Los Angeles, 137 points: You might say that Los Angeles is hampered because of its sheer size, with more than 17 million residents in the greater L.A. area. But hey, New York made the top 10, and it's even bigger.

Even after more than a decade and a half, the City of Angels has yet to fully recover from the end of the Cold War. Los Angeles seems to have never gotten over losing thousands of high-paying aerospace jobs, which either disappeared or moved to other states because business restrictions were too onerous.

Jack Kyser, chief economist with the Los Angeles County Economic Development Department, puts the blame squarely on the shoulders of another city in the Bottom 10: Sacramento -- more specifically, its state lawmakers. Kyser says state officials have been openly hostile to business, and business leaders are returning the favor.

"One of the best things that could happen to L.A. County is if Sacramento would disappear," Kyser said.

Kyser did say, though, that the region's tourism is flourishing, and its international trade industry is growing rapidly. Of course, there's always the film industry, but only one company in that space, Walt Disney Co. is based locally. Plus, filmmakers are heading to cheaper regions to complete their films.