1. Pass a law that states that ObamaCare is on hold and cannot be implemented unless passed again by Congress by March 2013.

Bear in mind that ObamaCare is unpopular; the public wants it repealed. Also bear in mind that it never actually even had true support from either the House or Senate. The House Democrats only voted for it after being whipped, being told it was this or nothing, and perhaps Obama's presidency would fail. (If only they knew...)

And it could not be fixed in the Senate except by resort to a bullshit reconciliation maneuver.

Plus, it costs a great deal of money.

Plus, not that this matters, but it's unconstitutional in the first place. The re-vote could include a change to the wording on the mandate, making it explicitly a tax, which should shore it up, at least as regards the Constitution.

So Obama could get a fresh stimulus if he agreed to a 18 month suspension, subject to re-vote, on a dreadful bill the public hates.

But of course he won't compromise on that.

2. An immediate moratorium on all EPA regulations, and all other regulations, frankly -- again, until say March of 2013. On this one, bear in mind Obama doesn't actually have legislative power to do any of this crap; instead, he's stretching or shredding the Constitution to claim he can do these things via executive directive, empowering unelected bureaucrats to pass laws that the Congress refuses to.

If the liberals want a stimulus (and honestly, I think a tax-cut stimulus would be useful), then they can begin pondering what they can actually give up.

The public doesn't support ObamaCare or the EPA's economy-wrecking unconstitutional overreach. There is no actual popular support for either.

So the Democrats could agree to a law that actually reflected public will -- and, in exchange, some money would be freed up, and some Republicans would be more willing to contemplate some deficit spending in order to boost the economy.

But they won't consider these things. While the media bleats "compromise," I have not heard any Democrat signal he'd be willing to give up anything of note to secure such compromise.

They demand Republicans give up on their highest-priority agenda items, while offering nothing at all in return.

Democrats could agree to the things I mention -- but won't.

Obama is again "taking his case to the people" -- that worked out so well last time. And he says he's no longer going to try to make deals with the Republicans, but instead simply campaign for 2012 in the hopes of securing a mandate.

Um, he's been campaigning for 2012 for six months anyway. I'm not sure he ever actually wasn't campaigning for 2012.

However, if this is his plan, why not offer up the moratoriums and re-votes I suggest, to take place in March (or whatever) 2013? Put it all on the line. If you want a mandate, go out and tell the public that you need a mandate to keep ObamaCare and the ban on domestic drilling and all the rest of it.

And in the meantime, use that offer of a moratorium to secure Republican votes for a stimulus package (which, I repeat, must be almost entirely tax-cut based).

Everyone wins. Obama puts it all on 2012, as is his campaign strategy anyway. The public gets what it wants on ObamaCare -- a re-vote, which will probably result in defeat.

Krugman gets his stimulus, though not in the spendy form he prefers, but tax cuts are stimulative too, in case he didn't notice.

Obama gets a jolt to the economy, which is the only thing that can save him.

The Republicans get policy concessions.

The economy might even improve, so that more people get jobs.

Everyone wins.

But of course the supposed Party of Compromise won't even consider these things.

Posted by: Ace at 10:43 AM | Comments (193)
Post contains 668 words, total size 4 kb.

In the Watchmen -- the comic-book version, the real version -- Adrian Veidt's solution to avoiding a coming nuclear war was to fake an alien attack on New York City, an attack so monstrous and arresting that the Soviets and Americans were both frightened enough of a new The Other to put aside their differences and work together to fight the (unreal) menace.

Paul Krugman is now officially out of ideas, because that is in fact his new proposal.

PAUL KRUGMAN, NEW YORK TIMES: Think about World War II, right? That was actually negative social product spending, and yet it brought us out.

...

If we discovered that, you know, space aliens were planning to attack and we needed a massive buildup to counter the space alien threat and really inflation and budget deficits took secondary place to that, this slump would be over in 18 months. And then if we discovered, oops, we made a mistake, there aren’t any aliens, we’d be better–

This isn't just silliness. I don't mean that he's serious about implementing Veidt's plan.

I mean he has now simply fled into fantasy. Escaped into dreamlands of space monsters and giant robots.

Look, as I mentioned in my post below, it isn't even impossible to get a major stimulus package through Congress, even now. There are ways to do it.

But these ways involve making major ideological concessions to the Republicans -- which is only fair, since we own half of one branch of government.

But Krugman is another hopeless ideologue who cannot imagine compromising with thugs and brigands such as we, so rather than talk about plausible compromises which could get him the stimulus he won't stop talking about, he simply descends into Make Believe Pretend Land.

As Instapundit always says: We're in the very best of hands.

The political class is an abject failure in all ways. Rather than confront this fact -- which enlightened people (such as they assert they are) are supposed to do; enlightened people are supposed to engage in thoughtful self-evaluation, neutral reexamination of empirical evidence, and, occasionally, realistic consideration of plausible alternatives -- Krugman just starts talking up Chapter 11 of the Watchmen.

Posted by: Ace at 10:18 AM | Comments (221)
Post contains 390 words, total size 3 kb.

Although CAC noted that Obama had hit a new low in support on Sunday -- 39% -- few noticed that he had also accumulated a new high in disapproval. At 54%, that broke the previous disapproval record for a three-day track of 52%.

In today's new poll, Obama's numbers move back slightly -- to 41%/52% again, a mere (ahem) split of 11%.

But Sunday's numbers do represent, I think (or I wish-think), a real watershed for Obama, the moment when a lot of the 6% who bless him one day and curse him the next moved largely to the disapproval column, likely forever (barring some kind of triumph, which seems increasingly unlikely).

I think Obama's new mark is 40/50, and we'll see ooching back and forth around this range.

On the economy, Obama is stuck between the rock and a hard place. The hard place is that with a Republican House, he can't push a policy choice that could possibly add a spur to the economy -- deficit spending to add a Keynesian boost to the economy.

The rock is his intellectually incurious dogma that the government must grow at all costs, and his apparent unwillingness to note that tax cuts are also a Keynesian response to a bad economy.

While conservatives are against Keynesian spending (especially with the debt already forbiddingly high), they could possibly be persuaded to bless some Keynesian tax cutting.

So he continues saying the same crap, which everyone knows is the same crap. To the extent there is a psychological component to this downturn, it can only be remedied by something new, something the public might think could plausibly result in a better outcome; repeating crap about high-tech factories in Michigan and green jobs and a "brighter tomorrow" isn't new.

more...

Posted by: Ace at 09:51 AM | Comments (129)
Post contains 943 words, total size 6 kb.

From the timing, it's probably inspired by the Twitter-organized criminality in London.

The flash mob does not act violently, but instead smiles and laughs as it steals from the 7-11.

One thing about that "not violently" -- it is often claimed that thieves or vandals are not acting violently when they direct their mayhem against property.

But violence is implicit here: What is the point of a mob but to tell the property owner, "If you attempt to stop us, we have the numbers to beat you savagely"?

That threat is always present, and of course why bandits have long grouped together.

The shop worker here did not act to stop the thieves, but stayed behind the cashier desk in safety. That is the whole point of mob action -- intimidation.

The only upside of this is that, assuming they used Twitter to organize the mob-loot, there should be some record to pursue.

A polls says that 48% expect spending cuts to lead to violence -- but we've had no real spending cuts yet (quite the opposite, given Obama's 2 1/2 year spending spree) and yet we already have growing disorder.

Crime is not a "response to inequality." It is a response to the opportunity to commit crime, and the likely prospects of gain without penalty (or a penalty so lenient it is barely worthy of the name). It always has been.

Not Inspired By London? Taylork rebuts:

I don't know about that. These things have been going on in Philadelphia for a few years now.

Ah, well. Good point then. I didn't know that.

But still, when something gets world media exposure... After all, I hadn't heard of this; I guess the media mostly suppressed it, something that wasn't possible when London burned. more...

Posted by: Ace at 09:01 AM | Comments (339)
Post contains 306 words, total size 2 kb.

Out of work and pillaging local shoppes is no reason for one to lose their cradle-to-grave Gubmint stipend. Shame on you for even suggesting it.

UK: "Controversial plans are... counter-productive and overly expensive."

Monty: "Irretrievably BONED."

UPDATED w/ quoted blurb, for those who can't access the site:

Ministers are drawing up controversial plans to remove benefits from those convicted of taking part in the riots that engulfed England last week, in a move Liberal Democrats and independent experts have condemned as counter-productive and overly expensive.

Oh, and OT. Beat you ragamuffins to it!

Posted by: Open Blogger at 06:43 AM | Comments (345)
Post contains 101 words, total size 1 kb.

Skynet has taken over Wall Street.

Spain can't pay their defense bills. European NATO nations have never really paid their own military freight -- they've relied on Uncle Sugar's largesse so they could spend their money on social welfare programs instead. Now that Uncle Sugar's tit has run dry, they're finding that funding both a capable military and a pervasive welfare state out of their own funds is not possible. (NOTE: Mish, like many libertarians, can't resist a "US WAR IS EVIL" and "TEH TORTURE!!" thing, but we're so simpatico on matters financial that I just ignore it. You gotta take the sour with the sweet.)

President Nixon's golden error.

James Galbraith admits that the government's fiscal policy is wrong? It's a blow to the head; it has to be. Somebody call an ambulance for this guy -- he's clearly not himself.

Should we shut down the US Postal Service? Yes. It doesnÂ’t have a viable business model, and itÂ’s been a money-sink for decades.

The founding financial crisis.

Harry Reid believes that the Tea Party will fade away. Harry Reid also believes in UFOs, astral projections, mental telepathy, ESP, clairvoyance, spirit photography, telekinetic movement, full trance mediums, the Loch Ness monster and the theory of Atlantis.

Peter (NOT Christopher) Hitchens drops the hammer on the UK government. A taste:

Take our Prime Minister, who is once again defrauding far too many people. He uses his expensive voice, his expensive clothes, his well-learned tone of public-school command, to give the impression of being an effective and decisive person. But it is all false. He has no real idea of what to do. He thinks the actual solutions to the problem are ‘fascist’. Deep down, he still wants to ‘understand’ the hoodies.

Say to him that naughty children should be smacked at home and caned in school, that the police (and responsible adults) should be free to wallop louts and vandals caught in the act, that the police should return to preventive foot patrols, that prisons should be austere places of hard work, plain food and discipline without TV sets or semi-licit drugs, and that wrongdoers should be sent to them when they first take to crime, not when they are already habitual crooks, and he will throw up his well-tailored arms in horror at your barbarity.

Say to him that divorce should be made very difficult and that the state should be energetically in favour of stable, married families with fathers (and cease forthwith to subsidise families without fathers) and he will smirk patronisingly and regard you as a pitiable lunatic.
Say to him that mass immigration should be stopped and reversed, and that those who refuse any of the huge number of jobs which are then available should be denied benefits of any kind, and he will gibber in shock.

Will Obama “fight” on the economy? On what grounds can he claim success at anything he’s done so far? His record is one of colossal failure in every regard -- a fight over the economy at this point is a fight on GOP ground, and he’ll lose. Badly.

Republicans contend that the Obama administration has mismanaged the nationÂ’s recovery from the 2008 financial crisis. Mr. ObamaÂ’s political advisers are struggling to define a response, aware that their prospects may rest on persuading voters that the results of the first term matter less than the contrast between their vision for the next four years and the alternative economic ideas offered by Republicans.

Gambling is wrong! Except, er, when it fills state coffers, like with the lottery or maybe some web gambling sites. Then itÂ’s okay.

More evidence that "follow your dreams" is often really shitty career advice. Remember, kids: if it was fun they wouldn't call it "work".

Italy approves tough austerity measures. Of course, adopting those measures doesnÂ’t mean that theyÂ’ll actually be followed. Why, oh why, won't those stingy German bastards fund our profligacy, the Italians (and Greeks, and Portuguese) wonder.

Federal money cut back: liberal states and cities hardest hit. The throbbing liberal outrage is so palpable you can feel it. Though Medicaid is mentioned, no reference is made to the fact that it is among the prime drivers of state debt. Nor is the pressure that public-sector retiree pension and healthcare costs are putting on states and municipalities. No, itÂ’s all the fault of those nasty, evil Republicans, who control one half of one-third of the federal government apparatus. Keep the dream alive, NYT!

The 10 housing markets that will collapse this year. No surprises on this list.

Another “blue” pension crisis: San Francisco. In the coming years, SanFran is going to provide some of the most entertaining blue-on-blue fights you're ever going to see as public-sector retirees, unions and pet liberal programs compete with each other for public dollars.

UPDATE 1: The real crisis is not a debt crisis. Actually, it is a debt crisis because debt is a drag on growth. Thus to say that we are in a "growth crisis" is just a different way of saying that we're in a debt crisis. We can't grow our way out of the debt we're carrying. (Oh, and: the Tea Party folks are the essence of pure evil. Just in case you didn't get that message over the weekend. EVIL, I SAY!!!)

UPDATE 2: Short-selling bans are futile. Investors can find many ways to short an investment, including the classic way: by staying out of the market altogether.

UPDATE 3: Via Insty. Next up in the meltdown parade...Paris? Take heart, folks. However bad things are here, they are much worse over in Europe.

UPDATE 4: The liberal philosophy in a nutshell: for every problem there must a program! How about a "Department of Jobs"? How about no, you pack of cretinous douchebags! How about we simply get rid of six or eight federal bureaucracies altogether?
more...

Posted by: Monty at 04:51 AM | Comments (222)
Post contains 1007 words, total size 9 kb.

My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 02:53 AM | Comments (134)
Post contains 21 words, total size 1 kb.

This chapter's theme is European Demographic Doom. Covers much of the same territory as America Alone but focuses on the population decline and mostly skips religion. I spell out the relevance of EDD to America at the end.

Settle down for today's dose of doom - in honor of the heavy Greek coverage perhaps a cup of hemlock would be in order?

more...

Posted by: Open Blogger at 02:17 AM | Comments (20)
Post contains 490 words, total size 3 kb.

Oh and congrats to our own Christopher Taylor who's just published his second book.

Why 21st Century Warfare Is Different (and the US Military Is So Good)

Here's a good roundup from Strategy Page on why the US military is able to kill our enemies so effectively while taking historically low causalities.

After ten years of fighting, the war on terror has caused 51,600 American military casualties (6,200 dead and 45,400 wounded). This includes a small number of CIA, State Department and other agency personnel. Over 99 percent are Department of Defense. Not all the casualties were from combat, with 21 percent of the deaths from non-combat causes. In World War II that was 25 percent.

What made the experience so different today, versus past wars? It was a combination of things. The most important difference is that the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan are fighting smarter. While the Vietnam era troops were representative of the general population, the post-Vietnam era army is all-volunteer and highly selective. The troops are smarter, healthier and better educated than the general population. During the last three decades, new attitudes have developed throughout the army (which always got most of the draftees). The army, so to speak, has become more like the marines (which was always all-volunteer, and more innovative as a result). This ability to quickly analyze and adapt gets recognized by military historians, and other armies, but not by the media. It also saves lives in combat.

Posted by: Maetenloch at 05:25 PM | Comments (678)
Post contains 905 words, total size 8 kb.

Never let it be said that the WaPo isn't doing their bit to carry Obama's water. Get ready for 15 months of this kind of stuff from the hacks at the NYT and WaPo (and the LAT, and the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, and...well, you know).

Posted by: Monty at 01:02 PM | Comments (588)
Post contains 76 words, total size 1 kb.