It Feels Like a Depression to Me

By Alan Caruba

Between the time that George Washington took the first oath of office as president and when Barack Obama did—-1789 to 2009, the United States had borrowed nine trillion dollars. Since Obama took office, it has borrowed or imposed nearly three trillion more debt. Tell me he is not deliberately seeking to bankrupt the nation.

In an August 28 Wall Street Journal editorial it noted that “To no one’s surprise except Vice President Joe Biden’s, second quarter economic growth was revised down yesterday to 1.6% from the prior estimate of growth of 2.4% which was down from first quarter growth of 3.7%, which was down from the 2009 fourth quarter’s 5%. Economic recoveries are supposed to go in the other direction.”

I was born during the Great Depression of the 1930s and have lived long enough now to find myself in a new one. There are similarities between the two, but the first one led to the creation of a variety of government regulatory entities and programs that should have avoided or at least were expected put the brakes on the current one.

At the heart of the current Depression is the government’s intrusion into the nation’s housing market via Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, government “entities” that functioned to purchase the mortgages provided by banks and lending companies that, by law, were required to make “sub-prime” bad loans. They have since been seized and billions remain at risk until such time as they are removed from distorting the housing market.

The mortgages were then bundled and resold to banking and investment firms. When the housing “bubble” failed, it threatened the financial structure of the nation. It was a classic asset bubble as people used their homes as piggy banks, taking second mortgages to pay for lifestyles that often did not include saving money for a rainy day. If this sounds like infantile behavior, it is.

Despite the multi-billion dollar bank bailouts initiated in 2008 at the end of the second Bush term and “stimulus” bailouts continued by the Obama administration, the recession has grown longer and there is talk of a “second recession.” This is like saying the family drunk or druggie has a “consumption problem.”

Despite zero interest rates for banks borrowing from the Federal Reserve justifiable fears have slowed lending. Consumers have held off spending. Home sales reached a 15-year low in June.

If the Obama administration and Congress allow the Bush tax cuts to expire, it will deepen the current crisis. In 1932 President Hoover persuaded Congress to raise taxes and we know this led to a decade of a severe economic Depression.

Poor monetary policy drove the Great Depression and is being repeated in this one. Government does not create jobs. Its highest priority is to protect the U.S. dollar so that investment and growth can be maintained.

E. Ralph Hostetter, publisher of American Farm Publications, recently noted that “The federal government has been in control of the U.S. dollar since 1913 when the Federal Reserve Banking System was established.”

“The 130 years prior to 1913, going back to 1783, was the longest period of currency stability in U.S. history. Since the dollar came under control of the Federal Reserve Bank in 1913, it has lost 90 percent of its original value. Eighty percent of that loss has occurred since President Richard Nixon took the United States off the gold standard in 1971.”

As Gerald P. O’Driscall Jr. recently wrote in a Wall Street Journal essay, “The solution lies in restoring balance sheets. For financial firms that means raising capital. For consumers and businesses alike, that means saving more of their reduced incomes.” He warned that “Low interest rates slow the process…by keeping asset prices artificially inflated.” The current Federal Reserve interest rate is zero.

The entire governmental and economic system depends on trust and the Obama administration has squandered that by constantly telling Americans that things were getting better when it was obvious to everyone they were not.

Claims that “shovel ready” projects would turn around the economy were false. Only 3.3% of the $814 billion stimulus was allocated to the Federal Highway Administration for highway and bridge projects. The bulk of the funds expended were directed at retaining civil service jobs of teachers and funds for police and firefighters. Union contracts, fat with pension and health benefits, have bankrupted many States.

In early August first-time claims for unemployment hit a nine-month high. Since the stimulus passed, 2.6 million Americans have lost their jobs and 1.2 million have given up trying to find a new one. Despite the 9.6% figure the government cites, the actual levels of unemployment are far closer to 20%.

During the Great Depression, unemployment was 25% and wages fell 42%.

The nation has reached a point where well-respected economists are now openly using the “Depression” word. David Rosenberg, writing in his daily briefing to investors, warned against interpreting the occasional blips of Gross Domestic Product and stock market gains as signs of recovery. Other economists from major investment and banking institutions are reducing their GDP predictions for 2010 to an anemic range of 1.5% to 2%.

The United States is not in “a summer of recovery” and is not likely to see any recovery if taxes increase. Massive “reform” of Medicare will drive up insurance and healthcare costs. Massive infusions of taxpayer money to keep states afloat to pay for Medicaid and other mandated costs are temporary at best.

Social Security, insolvent because successive Congresses have raped its so-called trust fund, will require a major overhaul to protect those who have paid into it and free new generations from its requirements.

Tax “holidays” are needed to allow businesses and consumers to keep their money instead of handing it over to a profligate federal government and to States that have failed to exercise fiscal sanity.

Get used to the word “Depression.” That’s what we’re in and the first step to get out of it will be to send people to Congress who will address these problems.

© Alan Caruba, 2010

Billboards Seen Around America

That was then, this is now

Hurricane Humility

By Alan Caruba

Who among us can remember back, oh so long ago, when Hurricane Earl was a Category 4, just one degree shy of the Katrina’s astonishing destruction of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast States of Mississippi and Alabama?

Those of us on the East Coast were assured that Earl would smash into North Carolina’s the barrier islands, dash up toward Newark, New Jersey, and then onward to Nantucket and pretty much anywhere else Earl wanted to go. The predictions were ominous.

I live in New Jersey and it is late afternoon on Friday as this is being written. Not a drop of rain in sight. No doubt some will arrive later tonight, but Earl has veered out into the Atlantic and is just barely holding on to a Category 1 status.

How many hours did Fox News, the Weather Channel, and all the others devote to sensational satellite pictures of the Mighty Earl until, over the hours, it became apparent that those intrepid reporters waiting for it to come ashore were reduced to interviewing disgruntled surfers unhappy that they could not commit suicide in Earl’s surging waves?

This is what I keep telling people over and over again. The weather is the perfect definition of chaos. It will do what it wants to do and not what the geniuses sweating over “computer models” say it will do.

We humans in our suburbs and great cities are like tiny insects in its path. People that keep telling you that humans are altering the climate are lying to you.

That’s why we have to ask ourselves, if the meteorologists cannot predict what a Category 4 hurricane will do with more than a wisp of certainty, why should anyone listen to those charlatans who insist they know what the weather will be in five, ten, twenty or fifty years?

I’m not talking about legitimate climatologists who study trends over centuries, but the one’s that insist on transforming the economy and society out of their conceit that they know that “global warming” is coming and it’s going to be bad.

It’s not coming; the Earth has been cooling for the past decade. It is a perfectly natural and well-known cycle. It could stick around a few years. Or it could mutate into the next Ice Age.

Today my local daily newspaper had an editorial about global warming and why the skeptics are wrong. That is a level of denial and flat-out ignorance that defies reality.

The reality is that the most sophisticated weather forecasting computer models, along with weather satellites, did not know with any certainty what Hurricane Earl was going to do or go. It largely spared the East Coast and piddled off into the Atlantic. News at eleven.

I am glad the radio and television meteorologists tried to warn us and I am glad that the hurricane turned out to be far less destructive than anticipated, but I know they had no more idea than I what would occur.

© Alan Caruba, 2010

Unfair, Butt True

It is clearly unfair to compare, from left to right, Princess Letizia of Spain, Carla Bruni, the wife of France's president, and Aunt Esther...I mean Michelle Obama, seen here together. That said, one picture is still worth a thousand words.

It's wrong! Wrong to compare first ladies, but this one is always going on about what we should eat and how much.

Two Crazy Greens

By Alan Caruba

For a few hours on Wednesday the nation’s attention was on James J. Lee who took hostages at the Discovery Communications headquarters in Silver Spring, Maryland. Negotiations failed to sway him from his mission or free his hostages. Lee was a Green zealot and police were left with no alternative than to shoot Lee dead.

Every movement has its crazies, but not every movement is as crazy as the one that calls itself “environmental.” Almost entirely devoid of any real scientific justification, the Greens have devoted decades to literally inventing one bogus crisis after another, culminating with “global warming.”

At the heart of the Green philosophy is the belief that the Earth’s problems are all caused by human beings.

“Humanity are the most destructive, filthy, pollutive creatures around and are wrecking what’s left of the planet with their false morals and breeding culture,” Lee wrote in an eleven-point Internet communiqué.

“Saving the Planet means…decreasing the Human population. That means stopping the human race from breeding any more disgusting human babies”, said Lee. “The planet does not need humans.”

We can dismiss Lee as a lunatic, but what are we to do regarding Dr. John P. Holdren, the top science advisor to President Obama?

In a new book, “Control Freaks”, Terence P. Jeffrey, the Editor-in-Chief of CNSnews.com, devotes several pages to Dr. Holdren, along with his colleague, Dr. Paul R. Ehrlich, the author of the 1968 bestseller “The Population Bomb.” Both academics have collaborated over the years and both share a contempt for humanity that can only come from fevered, delusional minds devoted to intellectual theories.

In a paper published in 1973 by the California Institute of Technology, Dr. Holdren asked “Is even the present U.S. population of 210 million too large? Should there be zero economic growth as well as zero population growth?” Together with Dr. Ehrlich, he later wrote, “Halting population growth must be done, but that alone would not be enough. Stabilizing or reducing the per capita resources in the United States is necessary, but not sufficient.”

The famous six degrees of separation between James J. Lee and Dr. Holdren is glaringly obvious. Lee’s manifesto said that finding “solutions for Global Warming, Automotive pollution, International Trade, factory pollution, and the whole blasted human economy” was the only way to save the planet.

Tell me that there is a whit of difference between Dr. Holdren’s and Lee’s “solutions”. Tell me there's any difference between Dr. Holdren’s and Dr. Ehrlich’s view that “What is actually required is nothing less than a transformation of human society” and the transformation that Obama has been imposing on the United States of America?

Jeffrey reports that “This transformation would start with population control, which might eventually require involuntary measures if voluntary ones failed.” Dr. Holdren recommended that “Several coercive proposals deserve discussion, mainly because societies may ultimately have to resort to them unless current trends in birth rates are rapidly reversed by other means.”

“Political pressure must be applied immediately to induce the United States government to assume its responsibility to hold the growth of the American population,” wrote Dr. Holdren.

Dr. Holdren is no fan of the human race in general and those enjoying citizenship in the United States in particular, given his lack of regard for free speech. Both he and Dr. Ehrlich at one point advocated making it “illegal for any utility to advertise in such a way as to promote greater demand for power.”

What better way to reduce available electrical power than to advocate switching to wind and solar energy which together barely represent one percent of the electricity generated daily? Neither is dependable and neither can ever meet the needs of the nation.

What better way than to oppose the use of coal for plants that generate just over fifty percent of the nation’s electrical power or to keep a multi-billion dollar repository for spent nuclear waste closed?

What better way to kill millions of people who fall victim to a disease like Malaria than to ban DDT, the most effective way of eliminating mosquitoes from transmitting it?

What better way to embolden a nuclear attack on the nation, killing millions, than to advocate treaties to reduce our nuclear deterrent?

There are no environmental solutions except those similar to the Nazi “final solution” that killed six million of Europe’s Jews and five million other presumed enemies of the state in Germany. Those in charge of Germany in the 1930s were dedicated environmentalists.

So, James J. Lee is one less environmentalist thanks to a SWAT team, but what are we to do about Dr. John P. Holdren and the host of other environmental crazies seeking to eliminate humans from planet Earth?

© Alan Caruba, 2010

America Goes Buggy Over Bed Bugs

By Alan Caruba

When The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and all other media in America begin to devote lots of space and time to the subject of bed bugs, you know America has a real pest problem.

Uniquely, I know a lot of pest control professionals because I have worked closely with the industry for a quarter century providing public relations services.

So let me say that I have the ANSWER to the nation’s plague of bed bugs.

It’s called PESTICIDES.

Not just any pesticides, but specifically the ones that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has successfully banned or forced pesticide manufacturers to stop registering or manufacturing because of the cost involved.

The truth you will never read elsewhere is that there are pesticides that will rid the nation of this massive bed bug population explosion and they will do so rapidly. Can you imagine an end to the current bed bug infestations just about everywhere in say, a month?

The problem is that the pesticides I have in mind are not available because the EPA has removed them from use by either pest control professionals or consumers. Meanwhile, pest control professionals are doing everything they can with the methods available to them, all the time being called unreliable or worse. The options they have at their disposal are few and usually expensive.

The public keeps being told that bed bugs are resistant to many of the presently available pesticides. That’s true. There is one, however, that does work against them. It’s Propoxur, a carbamate, and pest control professionals and state health officials alike are waiting for an emergency exemption to use it because the label permitting its use is already in existence. A pesticide can only be used against the insect pests for which it has received a label registration.

Propoxur used to be available, but in 1996 the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) was passed and changed the rules under which individual pesticides were deemed toxic. Instead of meeting a safety factor rating of, say 100, FQPA demanded a new rating of 1,000. It’s call a “risk cup” and it swallows perfectly good pesticides whole and makes them go away. It was one of those arbitrary and bureaucratic rulings that had no relationship to the actual science or even the risk involved.

That’s how environmentalists who want to end the use of all pesticides work the angles. They find ways to get legislation and regulations passed that effectively eliminate any rational reason for a manufacturer to spend some $300 million to bring a new pesticide to market. Then, after one has been working successfully for fifteen years, the EPA requires that more money be spent to re-register it for use despite ample evidence that it poses no health hazard when properly applied.

That’s a rigged game and, ultimately, it is rigged against Americans who understandably expect and want to be pest-free.

Now, why would environmentalists want to end the use of pesticides? Because, without them, insect and rodent pests spread disease and disease kills people.

If there is one thing that really bothers environmentalists it is the presence of human beings on planet Earth. Scratch a Green and they will tell you there are too many people and they need too much food, too much water, and take up too much space to exist.

The fewer number of pesticides that are permitted for use, the sooner the pests will develop resistance to them. That is one reason the bed bug population is thriving. As a colleague of mine points out, however, “Resistance is the pattern in nature. Plants have an arsenal of pesticides they naturally produce to ward off attack by insects, and they need them, because insects develop resistance to what they are using to defend themselves.”

“If bed bugs were transmitting some sort of deadly disease,” says my colleague, “we wouldn’t be having this conversation. We would get Dursban tomorrow and bed bugs would be gone by the end of the week.”

The problem, however, is that the EPA forced Dow Chemical Company to stop making Dursban available to consumers several years ago. It fell into the “risk cup.”

Why is there a massive bed bug population explosion in the U.S.? Ask the EPA.

© Alan Caruba, 2010