In the current crisis, there is a lot of wisdom in the idea that the best thing for politicians and their appointed central bankers right now is to do absolutely nothing. Nada, zip, the square root of zero. To do nothing would be the gutsiest option of all. Of course, Mr “Hope and Change” Obama is unlikely to show that sort of courage, nor will Gordon Brown or, heaven help us, David Cameron.
I actually have a theory, that the amount of time that a politician talks about courage, audacity, vision, etc, is inversely related to the actual possession of those qualities. Not even Mrs Thatcher went on about her courage all the time: the most we ever got was the “resolute approach”. And she delivered by taking genuinely brave stands on issues in the teeth of furious opposition from the chattering classes and the media establishments of the time. And in terms of telling folk what they did not want to hear and sticking to a tough policy, politicians such as former UK finance minister Geoffrey Howe in the early 1980s, wiped the floor with today’s lot.
Interesting post from someone called “Angry Homeowner” underneath that article. He wants forced 1% home loans and all manner of things banned. I wonder how prevalent this view is.
This is really a general rule: the more claims are stamped on the outside of a product, the more likely it is that the product is nothing but claims. See, for instance, cheap binoculars. which are covered with logos and multicolored text, where a quality pair has maybe two lines of white-on-black on the back.
Incidentally, the reason the “do nothing” meme won’t get much currency is because for politicians the crisis isn’t about the economy, it’s about them.
On the op-ed page of this week’s Defense News (Normally full of semi commie tranzi bulls**t.) There is an excellent piece by Harvey Sapolsky “Lets Skip Acquisition Reform This Time.” That makes the case that America’s military procurement problems are inevitable given the nature of technology, the nature of war and the nature of human beings.
OT
Thanks to a recent posting of yours, Johnathan, I’ve just read Austerity Britain and have started The Intellectual Life of the British Working Classes.
Both very interesting
Thanks
The following chart says all you need to know….
The only question remaining is how long the government stimulus will prolong the recession.
I would gladly fork over a donation to send every last representative from Washington on a Mediterranean cruise for the next six months just so that we can speed up the recovery.
And as a taxpayer I would save a sizable amount by paying for air and lodging for our elected representatives to take this cruise instead of letting Barney Frank and Nancy Pelosi play crapswith the country’s credit card.
I’m beginning to think Perry has something here with the whole “let these idiots burn the place to the ground instead of letting McCain prolong the inevitable” deal.
Obama is killing off the liberaltarians already.
…happy days are here again..
“Doing nothing” philosopher on video: Robert Higgs on Fox. Higgs is an Austrian economist, following in the footsteps of von Mises, Hayek, Rothbard, and the recently highly profiled broker Peter Schiff.
Not even try:
“If you flew the entire SEC staff to Boston and sent them to Fenway Park for the afternoon, they would not be able to find first base.”
Regarding the banks you are quite correct J.P. – governments should do nothing and allow those that are going to go bankrupt to go bankrupt (Bank of America and Citigroup to name two).
In Britain telling Lloyds T.S.B. that there would be government support if they took over HBOS has meant that Lloyds is now in terrible trouble – whereas, had it been informed there would be no support for it or HBOS, Lloyds might have survived as a real enterprise (as there would have been no merger without the government promises).
Not a small point as it is the largest bank in the United Kingdom.
This is about the only time I have ever agreed with “Ken” Clarke – although he managed to get the wrong end of the stick by talking about competition regulations, whereas it was the promise of bailout money that was important.
However, on fiscal policy (tax and spend) you are totally wrong J.P.
Radical action must be taken and it must be taken now.
Accept that this radical action should be to CUT government spending, rather than to increase it.
Radical action should also be taken to deregulate the labour market.
Only by radical cuts in government spending and by radical deregulation of the labour market can the comming slump be made shorter and less terrible.
By the way you are wrong about Comrade Barack Obama – it is not lack of courage that prevents him doing the right thing economically.
Oddly enough I suspect he knows what the right thing is (unlike the poor baby Bush).
But Barack Obama (President of the United States – almost unbelieveable but he is) is also a dedicated enemy of the United States.
A man committed (by training going back to his most early years as a child) to the destruction of what he considers the main capitalist power on Earth.
It is true that he never went on any active service missions with the ACORN (and other) thugs he trained – but that may have been a tactical thing.
Whilst there is no evidence of courage it is possible that he is a brave man – perhaps he would even lay down his life to achieve his objective of doing as much damage to the West in general, and to the United States in particular, as he can.
Regarding the banks you are quite correct J.P. – governments should do nothing and allow those that are going to go bankrupt to go bankrupt (Bank of America and Citigroup to name two).
In Britain telling Lloyds T.S.B. that there would be government support if they took over HBOS has meant that Lloyds is now in terrible trouble – whereas, had it been informed there would be no support for it or HBOS, Lloyds might have survived as a real enterprise (as there would have been no merger without the government promises).
Not a small point as it is the largest bank in the United Kingdom.
This is about the only time I have ever agreed with “Ken” Clarke – although he managed to get the wrong end of the stick by talking about competition regulations, whereas it was the promise of bailout money that was important.
However, on fiscal policy (tax and spend) you are totally wrong J.P.
Radical action must be taken and it must be taken now.
Accept that this radical action should be to CUT government spending, rather than to increase it.
Radical action should also be taken to deregulate the labour market.
Only by radical cuts in government spending and by radical deregulation of the labour market can the comming slump be made shorter and less terrible.
By the way you are wrong about Comrade Barack Obama – it is not lack of courage that prevents him doing the right thing economically.
Oddly enough I suspect he knows what the right thing is (unlike the poor baby Bush).
But Barack Obama (President of the United States – almost unbelieveable but he is) is also a dedicated enemy of the United States.
A man committed (by training going back to his most early years as a child) to the destruction of what he considers the main capitalist power on Earth.
It is true that he never went on any active service missions with the ACORN (and other) thugs he trained – but that may have been a tactical thing.
Whilst there is no evidence of courage it is possible that he is a brave man – perhaps he would even lay down his life to achieve his objective of doing as much damage to the West in general, and to the United States in particular, as he can.
the problem with the do nothing approach is that it would work perfectly.
The outcome being, why do we need politicians – a much harder question for politicians to answer
Thanks for the article, very helpful. I will study it.