Thursday, August 31, 2006

Fighting Global Warming

From Reuters: California takes lead in U.S. global warming fight

California's Global Warming Solutions Act aims to cut emissions to 1990 levels, or around 25 percent, by 2020 with an enforceable cap and mandatory reporting for top polluters like energy companies.
Presumably, California will have a crash program to build nuclear power plants as well as thousands of wind turbines along the entire Pacific coast (just kidding... they'll be on top of the redwoods).

Actually, it's a admirably plan regardless of whether it has any affect on climate at all. If it leads to faster implementation of better, more efficient, energy technology, then it is a worthwhile effort ... even if it costs the citizens of California a lot of money to implement.

The article went on to quote oil-monger spokesman grousing about the effort:
"It is unfortunate such important legislation is being put together at the last minute without proper review and scrutiny, especially because of its potential to harm the economy," said Tupper Hull, a spokesman for the Western States Petroleum Association.
Hey, who could ever find credibility in anything coming from someone named "Tupper?"

Tuesday, August 29, 2006


Traffic has finally started moving along.

From CNNMoney:

2:24pm: Fed officials say they wanted to gather more data on inflation before deciding on future rate rises, according to the minutes of their August meeting. (more)
2:33pm: Central bank can't let inflation build up steam, Dallas Fed President says. (more)
1:03pm: August reading lowest since November on worries about economy, jobs. (more)
The Federal Reserve always acts on old information... and is the only cause of U.S. recessions.

Milton Friedman, no doubt is correct. The Fed is probably not necessary to keep the money supply under control... and unsaid... not cause recessions. See yesterday's post.

Monday, August 28, 2006

Friedman Economics 101

An interesting podcast at Cafe Hayek which takes about 1/2 hour... but worthwhile. Dr. Friedman argues, fairly convincingly, that the Federal Reserve system is pretty much unnecessary... and Dr. Roberts expresses the common frustration that it is, at times, incomprehensible... even to an economist.

Thursday, August 24, 2006

Asked and Answered

August 19, 2006 at 16:09:13

34 talking points for Dems. In case they decide they want to govern again.

by Jay Esbe

1. Is the United States safer without it's allies? with/without ... except for the British... not much difference.

2. Is the United States safer with it's military decimated and trapped in Iraq losing a batallion a month? decimate... "destroy 1/10th"... 1/10 of 2,000,000 troops = 200,000... 1/10 of 200,000 = 20,000... 1/10 of 20,000 = 2,000. So, 1/10 of 1/10 of 1/10 is "decimated"... or hyperbole.

3. Is the United States safer with the entire Arab world enraged on account of an illegal war? No... the entire Arab world is not "enraged" or engaged... only those who really, really want to use religion as an excuse to justify their power grab.... But are we talking about Iraq or the Arab attacks against Israel for 60 years despite the UN sanctioned borders?

4. Did Bush get Bin Laden? Wouldn't have had to try if Clinton had taken him in the 90s.

5. Is the United States safer with the Taliban back in Afghanistan and not enough troops because of Iraq? Perhaps safer with them in the caves than running the country.

6. Was America prepared on September 10th 2001 with Bush explicitly warned and supposedly in charge? What happened to the preparation that the Democrats should have started after the first attack on the World Trade Center and Hezbollah attacks on our troops?

7. Was New Orleans safer with Bush in charge? I thought the mayor of the "chocolate city" was a Democrat?... likewise the Governor of Louisiana.

8. Do you like being told that if you don't support Republicans, you're "on the side of the terrorists"? Not "on the side of the Terrorists"... just on the sidelines for doing anything.

9. Did Bush "solve the middle east problem" or is it now erupting in flames? Did anyone "solve" it. Hey, Bill, what was your solution again?

10. Do you feel safer when Republicans cut port security bugets? Is security spending in total up or down? How much was spent in total by Bill versus George.

11. Did it tell you something when Bush tried to turn New York/New Jersey port security over to an Arab co mpany? That maybe the Democrats who got so upset see all Arabs as Iranians?

12. Does it tell you something that the same Arab company is still in charge of New York/New Jersey port security 6 months after the arrangement was supposedly banned by congress? That the process of turning over the port to another company actually needs another company?

13. Do you wonder why Bush opposed the creation of the 9-11 commission? Hey, that's a good one! Do you suppose he was trying to protect the Democrats who did nothing for the 8 years prior to his taking over just a year prior?

14. Do you wonder why he immediately hired a personal attorney after 9-11? Because he was the one who flew the planes into the towers? Maybe because he understood that rather than address the situation, the Democrats would rather blame someone.

15. Do you wonder why Bush and Cheney REFUSED to be sworn in to swear to tell the truth when questioned by Congress about 9-11? You mean separation of powers? Ooops.

16. Did you liked being lied to 237 times to "justify" attacking Iraq? No, Bush should not have used information that was prepared during the Clinton administration. Shame on him for trusting the Democrats.

17. Do you think a man who was willing to lie 237 times to attack a country which never attacked us, and to kill a hundred thousand innocent people in Iraq, might have been willing to kill three thousand people in New York city to "justify" doing what he wanted to do? Ouch! Stretching that far must really, really hurt.

18. Do you think letting a thousand illegal aliens a day cross our border while confiscating your shampoo at the airport is a legitimate national security policy? Where was that wall and National Guard during the Clinton administration... and which party has long sought immigrants to boost their voting base?

19. Do you think declaring there are "no symbols of national significance" in New York in order to justify cutting proposed anti-terrorism funding is a legitimate national security policy? It's still a lot higher than it was when Clinton was in charge.

20. Do you like the 20,000 Iraq casualties for NOTHING; no WMD, no democracy, no peace, only increasing chaos and death? I voted for it before I voted against it... Saddam was already doing a more efficient job of killing Iraqis, Kurds and Kuwaitis....

21. Do you like starting unnecessary wars and then LOSING them? "I voted for it before I was against it...." Jack Kennedy... oh, wrong war... but the only war we "lost."

22. Do you approve of remaining in a lost cause and watching our soldiers die only to protect Republican politicians from admitting the obvious defeat which has taken place? No, and we should take those 32,000 soldiers out of Korea and 60,000 soldiers out of Germany. Over a half-century is just too long. They've won the economic war. Let's just surrender.

23. Republicans have controlled all 3 branches of government for 6 years, who then is responsible for all this? Voters.

24. Do you think keeping the people who've lied and repeatedly failed national security on the job, to fix what they broke, is smart? No, that's why the Democrats were voted out.

25. Do you like living in the most hated nation on earth now? I don't live in Iran.

26. Do you like having a religious delusional who claimed ""God"" told him to strike at Saddam", with his finger on the nuclear button? No, the Ayatollah should have been assassinated and I'm glad that Israel destroyed the Iranian nuclear program... but I'm sure the Democrats don't have the same feelings now about the current Iranian president and nuclear program.

27. Would you like the United States to attack Iran on false WMD pretenses too? "Fool me once....": Bush couldn't even finish the sentance correctly, can you? No, I think it makes more sense for them to develop their nuclear arsenal and start "Armageddon" in accordance with Islamic tradition.

28. Do you want a man who believes Armageddon is "necessary" to fulfill his religious beliefs? Well, you can't have it both ways now. Do you want us to get rid of the President of Iran or not?

29. Do you want two more years of this nightmare? I agree, Ben Bernanke should be replaced.

30. Would you like Bush and Cheney re-questioned about 9-11 and compelled to answer under oath? Yes, and Clinton and Kerry and ....

31. Had enough fear? No, that's why I continue to play golf.

32. Had enough abuse of power, contempt of congress, violations of the Constitution, violations of the court, arrests, indefinite detainment, and torture without trial? He did not have sex with that woman... so everything else is okay.

33. Had enough of being ashamed of your own country, all on account of a few contemptible criminals? That's a little harsh talking about Hillary that way... she didn't have sex with that man.

34. Tired of being held hostage to elevated terror alerts before elections and having your patriotism questioned when you notice they're compulsive liars? Gosh, I didn't know the Brits where having an election two weeks ago.

If you have had enough, realize that the ONLY way to change this disastrous course, is to elect Democratic representatives who will act to remove Bush from office. A vote for ANY Republican anywhere, is a vote for more of the disasters you've already seen and worse to come. Wow, an asteroid is next?

Okay, I've been chastize for calling Iranians Arabs... which I know they are not because we had Iranian neighbors for 20 years and they fully educated us on the difference... but I didn't think anyone would actually know the difference... Dick!

Monday, August 21, 2006

XX Moderate

I really liked this interview from the Colbert Report (click your "back" button to return to this page):

David Gergen, pt. 1 -- Stephen asks David Gergen how someone can be a passionate moderate.
David Gergen, pt. 2 -- Stephen and David Gergen discuss truthiness.
David Gergen, pt. 3 -- Stephen and David Gergen chat about how political parties have changed.

Strange that the discussions were broadcast in color since most talk about politics is black and white... damn liberal, wimpo Democrats... cowboy, war-mongering Republicans....

Sunday, August 20, 2006

Occupation Forces

50 years... 60 years and still the Forces of the Occupation remain. The few years Americans have had a military presence in Baghdad pales by comparison.

Yet where are the outcries? Billions... trillions of dollars spent on military Occupations after trillions of dollars spent on warfare. Yet no leader has been challenged or criticized for the enormous drain on the economy or the immoral action of decades of Occupation. Iraq is a mere puddle in the oceanic history of Occupation. But memories are short.

When, when I say, will Germany and South Korea have economies and democratic political systems strong enough for U.S. troops to end their Occupation? How long after defeating an enemy must the U.S. stay to ensure democracy and world safety? It is 2006 and here are the Occupation Forces still deployed:

Germany 69,395
South Korea (United States Forces Korea) 32,744
Japan (United States Forces Japan) 35,307
Italy 12,258

That's nearly half of the Occupation Forces deployed to the present war zone of Iraq. That's about 10% of the deployed forces from World War II and 50% of the deployed forces from the Korean War.

With the exception of Italy, the countries listed above are beating our butts in many economic arenas. So why are we there?

It seems that American presidents... Democrats and Republicans... just like the idea of having the American military deployed around the world. The real question is: who is the enemy and why are they our enemy? In a world where the U.S. is roundly criticized for taking military action and having Occupation Forces, perhaps the time has come to take a different tactic.

Perhaps the U.S. should withdraw from all military locations around the world and let other nations fend for themselves. Bring the military home and be ready for any threat to the U.S. When, not if, we are attacked, go after the attackers with ruthlessness. But forget occupying attackers' countries. We spend too much being "good guys". Attack, destroy, withdraw. Leave the attackers in a state of chaos... and take out their supporters for good measure. No more stick and carrot. Just stick. Then forget about them for the next 50 years while they try to rebuild.

Let Germany and Italy deal with the oozing Muslim invasion of their countries. Let Japan deal with China. Let South Korea spend its profits from Samsung and Hyundai on guarding its own borders.

Sure, it's a high-risk strategy, but it is better than having Occupations Forces someplace for a few years... and trying to be "good guys" spreading "democracy" to the singular-minded. Take all of the money we spend protecting the world and replace it with an effort to create a Fortress America where we are self-sufficient and can tell the rest of the world to solve their own problems... and leave us alone... or else... and stay away... we don't like you anymore....

Hey, "Fortress America"... that's catchy. Wonder why no one else thought of that?

American exceptionalism oscillates between isolationism and evangelicalism. Virtue must be protected in America from a corrupt world—or imposed by America on a corrupt world. At times (such as the two decades between the First and Second World Wars), American exceptionalists have wanted to create a Fortress America and leave the rest of the world to succumb to decadence, anarchy, and tyranny. In other circumstances, American exceptionalists have been energized by a millennial fervor for reforming the world. The two impulses have sometimes coexisted. In the 1890s, for example, one fervent Protestant evangelical politician, William Jennings Bryan, denounced American imperialism, and an equally fervent Protestant evangelical preacher, Josiah Strong, argued that it was America’s destiny to Christianize the world by means of an expansive foreign policy.

The isolationist wing and the evangelical wing of American exceptionalism share a dread of alliances: It might be necessary to make immoral concessions to allies to enlarge or maintain a coalition, and the purity of America’s purpose in foreign policy would then be diluted. Even worse, alliances might infect the godly American republic with Old World viruses—autocracy, perhaps, or collectivism. This fear explains why the United States participated in World War I as an associated power, not an ally. It explains, too, why the United States for many years refused to grant diplomatic recognition to the Soviet Union and the People’s Republic of China; merely to engage in ordinary diplomatic relations with an evil regime is to condone its crimes. American exceptionalism is responsible as well for the frequent use of economic and military sanctions to punish all kinds of transgressions by foreign countries. And its influence can be sense both in the American Left’s enthusiasm for private disinvestment campaigns against countries with objectionable governments and in much of the American Right’s reflexive unilateralism and suspicion of international organizations and treaties.

Okay, so maybe a few people have thought about it....

Friday, August 18, 2006

Michigan Interstate Speedway

From the Road Commission for Oakland County interactive traffic map.


Wednesday, August 16, 2006


Moving forward... it has a lot of nuances. Toward a goal... improvement... growth... or literally moving forward.

For as long as I care to remember, I have contacted various agencies regarding traffic problems related to "bad signals". I was at it again yesterday and today. Perhaps unfairly, I criticized the Oakland County Road Commission (Michigan) regarding poor signal progression along main roads. Turns out that my favorite example, Telegraph Road, is under the authority of MDOT, an agency to which I have written often.

Traffic management is one of those mundane efforts that, ironically, affects us a lot more than terrorist threats, but get little public attention. Poor traffic management cost millions... billions?... of dollars in wasted fuel and time. The solutions are there; the interest to implement the solutions apparently is not. The USDOT has an interesting article online that was published in 2002 and is still very relevant.

Perhaps my next effort in this arena will be to provide a voice for motorists to express their feelings about this situation. $3.00 per gallon gasoline makes everyone more conscious about forced waste.

Previous posts:

That was just last year. It seems that unless there is a threat, government really doesn't care if we are upset about something. They have their ways.

Monday, August 14, 2006


Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah declared that his guerrillas achieved a "strategic, historic victory" over Israel.

AP Photo


Sunday, August 13, 2006

Inflationary Education

The Federal Reserve is concerned that the price of oil may be causing inflationary pressures in the U.S.

Well, the real culprit is the cost of tuition.

Universities, the bastion of intellectuals telling us how to live, have long known that they can be unreasonable about their tuition increases because they have the lock on the "credentials" box that people need to access for their professional futures.

Universities can be arbitrary, frivilous, wasteful, autocratic, and act with impugnity. They are the keepers of the keys.

Universities are the U.S. version of the oil cartel. Like the sheiks of the Middle East, the college boards can squeeze the people for more and more money with the promise of the good life. Unfortunately, more and more graduates are finding that they have paid a lot more for something that isn't really getting them very far... just like oil.

Friday, August 11, 2006

A Taxing Problem

I ran across this on Google that is as close to perfection as one can come:

"On my income tax 1040 it says 'Check this box if you are blind.' I wanted to put a check mark about three inches away."
- Tom Lehrer

Thursday, August 10, 2006

Hey, Connecticut ... Didja Hear The One About The...

British police thwart aircraft bomb plot

By DANICA KIRKA, Associated Press Writer 57 minutes ago

LONDON - British authorities said Thursday they had thwarted a terrorist plot to simultaneously blow up several aircraft heading to the U.S. using explosives smuggled in carry-on luggage. Heathrow was closed to most flights from Europe, and British Airways canceled all its flights Thursday between the airport and points in Britain, Europe and Libya.
Yup, Connecticut. We just have to sit down and reason with these people. We are reasonable people, so they must be reasonable people, too. Eh?

Why couldn't Joe Lieberman see this?

Wednesday, August 09, 2006

Oil as a Corrosive Substance

So the British Petroleum pipeline from Prudhoe Bay has a leak from corrosion.

What is it in oil that is corrosive, anyway? I sure don't want that stuff in my car's engine!

And water... that causes rust, too. Keep that out of my car's cooling system.

And gasoline... that's explosive and dangerous. Keep that away from my car, too.

Hmmm. I could ride a horse, but then I have to contend with horse shit. And if this bull goes on any longer, you are going to get buried in bullshit.
But here is the weirdest part.

Tuesday, August 08, 2006

Federal Reserve Holds Interest Rates

It's not as if they said they were not going to hit us, they were just not going to hit us harder... for now.

The Federal Reserve held their rate that they charge other banks for borrowing at 5.25% which doesn't sound all that bad except it translates into some pretty high rates at the consumer level.

Despite all of the talk about protecting us from inflation, I suspect it is more about protecting banks from inflation. After all, they don't want to lend money that can be paid back with inflated currency. So banks protect themselves, not us, from inflation by raising interest rates.

Monday, August 07, 2006

Are We Better Off Now?

Dr. Don Boudreaux writes in Cafe Hayek that:

Whether or not Americans are better off these days is a loaded political question. But one thing's for sure - their homes keep getting bigger.

Any American alive today who remembers 1973 and who continues to believe that ordinary Americans are no (or only slightly) materially better off today than we were thirty years ago is blind or seriously deceived.
My response was:

Again, only speculating, but my experience has show that the comparison of "household" income to 4 decades ago may be a little akin to comparing "work" with "exertion".

In this case, the obvious difference is the comparitor "household". If the percentage of two-income "household" incomes has increased in 40 years, then the comparison is purely ornamental. One would need to look at inflation-adjusted personal income to see why people might be getting the perception that they are "treading water".

After all, if it takes two people to live a lifestyle that is twice as costly as that which one person (on average) can provide, then we have only changed the definition of "household" in the sense that two incomes are now the basis for income rather than one.

Statistics that I have come across indicate that two-income homes have roughly doubled since the early 1970s. The jump from the mid-30%s to the mid-60%s could go a long way in explaining "household income" versus "individual income".

Then one has to look at the cost side of the equation... two cars to drive to work, two sets of work clothes, etc., plus childcare expense. Not really treading water... just a lot more paid work occurring.


So we are economically better off. Are we better off? Young people have to agonize about whether or not to have children because of the economic impact it will have on their lives. Then if they have children, they have to agonize about sending them off to daycare at the tender age of two months or not. Then they have to agonize about how they can juggle their work schedules when the children get sick. And so on and so on.

I recall when our first child was born that we were a two-income household that quickly became a one-income household. Were we better off? Yes.

Saturday, August 05, 2006

Now Others Are Saying It

Check out this on Robert Reich's blog.

On June 8 I wrote the Michigan was already in a recession and on July 29 I had an entry title very similar to Mr. Reich's.

But Big Ben's clock face shows only one time... Inflation Standard Time.

Thursday, August 03, 2006

Fearing Inflation

Yes, I'd say that inflation is what everyone is worried about right now.

74 Degrees at 74 Degrees

We live in a cold world compared to the geological near past.

Now, naturally, there is concern among some that the climate may be warming a bit. After all, it has been hundreds of thousands of years since mankind left the tropics to settle in colder areas of the planet. Certainly, our life-styles could be affected by warmer average global temperatures.

But, by and large, the earth remains a cold planet compared to the planet it was when there was an expansion of the diversity of life during its lush period 50-60 million years ago (98% point of life's timeline on this planet... beginning about 2.5 billion years ago). In fact, our current condition is a planet that is rather sparse with life comparatively.

Nature has a way of changing things despite our best efforts at trying to control everything. Little things like the gap between North and South America closing certainly did more than man could ever hope to accomplish. Sure, we may have some influence on the change, but we have a long way to go before the arctic reaches 74 degrees F again (Alaska averages between 10 and 40 degrees F).

The real question is: would we have a more or less habitable world... not just for man? I don't believe that question has really been posed... much less answered.

Wednesday, August 02, 2006


We should talk about this. We should just sit down and stop fighting and come together like the reasonable people that we are... and talk about this.

Mr. Hezbollah: "Death to Zionists; death to Jews."

Mr. Israeli: "How am I supposed to talk with him?"

Mr. World Opionion: "Now we all know that those kinds of outbursts are mere rhetoric for local consumption.

Mr. Hezbollah: "We will kill them all; that is our mission."

Mr. Israeli: "And just what is the point of discussion here?"

Mr. World Opinion: "Well, now, we are sure that with the right incentives, there can be peace for all."

Mr. Hezbollah: "We will destroy them and leave them in pieces. They can have their pieces."

Mr. Israeli: "What part of fanatical terrorist don't you understand?"

Mr. World Opinion: "They are just trying to establish their right to exist."

Mr. Hezbollah: "We are the voice of the Prophet!"

Mr. Israeli: "Excuse me, but we have to deal with some incoming missiles."

Mr. World Opinion: "Now you know that those things are really not all that effective. You should try to ignore them and stop targeting women and children."

Mr. Hezbollah: "We will not stop until the Zionist pigs are gone from the face of the earth."

Mr. Israeli: "Okay, then. My jet fighter negotiators are on their way."

Mr. World Opinion: "Once again, the Israelis have over-reacted and we will all have to suffer with higher oil prices."

Can"t Find It?

Use the SEARCH BLOG feature at the upper left. For example, try "Global Warming".

You can also use the "LABELS" below or at the end of each post to find related posts.

Blog Archive

Cost of Gasoline - Enter Your Zipcode or Click on Map

CO2 Cap and Trade

There is always an easy solution to every human problem—neat, plausible, and wrong.
Henry Louis Mencken (1880–1956)
“The Divine Afflatus,” A Mencken Chrestomathy, chapter 25, p. 443 (1949)
... and one could add "not all human problems really are."
It was beautiful and simple, as truly great swindles are.
- O. Henry
... The Government is on course for an embarrassing showdown with the European Union, business groups and environmental charities after refusing to guarantee that billions of pounds of revenue it stands to earn from carbon-permit trading will be spent on combating climate change.
The Independent (UK)

Tracking Interest Rates

Tracking Interest Rates


SEARCH BLOG: FEDERAL RESERVE for full versions... or use the Blog Archive pulldown menu.

February 3, 2006
Go back to 1999-2000 and see what the Fed did. They are following the same pattern for 2005-06. If it ain't broke, the Fed will fix it... and good!
August 29, 2006 The Federal Reserve always acts on old information... and is the only cause of U.S. recessions.
December 5, 2006 Last spring I wrote about what I saw to be a sharp downturn in the economy in the "rustbelt" states, particularly Michigan.
March 28, 2007
The Federal Reserve sees no need to cut interest rates in the light of adverse recent economic data, Ben Bernanke said on Wednesday.
The Fed chairman said ”to date, the incoming data have supported the view that the current stance of policy is likely to foster sustainable economic growth and a gradual ebbing in core inflation”.

July 21, 2007 My guess is that if there is an interest rate change, a cut is more likely than an increase. The key variables to be watching at this point are real estate prices and the inventory of unsold homes.
August 11, 2007 I suspect that within 6 months the Federal Reserve will be forced to lower interest rates before housing becomes a black hole.
September 11, 2007 It only means that the overall process has flaws guaranteeing it will be slow in responding to changes in the economy... and tend to over-react as a result.
September 18, 2007 I think a 4% rate is really what is needed to turn the economy back on the right course. The rate may not get there, but more cuts will be needed with employment rates down and foreclosure rates up.
October 25, 2007 How long will it be before I will be able to write: "The Federal Reserve lowered its lending rate to 4% in response to the collapse of the U.S. housing market and massive numbers of foreclosures that threaten the banking and mortgage sectors."
"Should the elevated turbulence persist, it would increase the possibility of further tightening in financial conditions for households and businesses," he said.

"Uncertainties about the economic outlook are unusually high right now," he said. "These uncertainties require flexible and pragmatic policymaking -- nimble is the adjective I used a few weeks ago."

December 11, 2007 Somehow the Fed misses the obvious.
[Image from:]
December 13, 2007 [from The Christian Science Monitor]
"The odds of a recession are now above 50 percent," says Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's "We are right on the edge of a recession in part because of the Fed's reluctance to reduce interest rates more aggressively." [see my comments of September 11]
January 7, 2008 The real problem now is that consumers can't rescue the economy and manufacturing, which is already weakening, will continue to weaken. We've gutted the forces that could avoid a downturn. The question is not whether there will be a recession, but can it be dampened sufficiently so that it is very short.
January 11, 2008 This is death by a thousand cuts.
January 13, 2008 [N.Y. Times]
“The question is not whether we will have a recession, but how deep and prolonged it will be,” said David Rosenberg, the chief North American economist at Merrill Lynch. “Even if the Fed’s moves are going to work, it will not show up until the later part of 2008 or 2009.
January 17, 2008 A few days ago, Anna Schwartz, nonagenarian economist, implicated the Federal Reserve as the cause of the present lending crisis [from the Telegraph - UK]:
The high priestess of US monetarism - a revered figure at the Fed - says the central bank is itself the chief cause of the credit bubble, and now seems stunned as the consequences of its own actions engulf the financial system. "The new group at the Fed is not equal to the problem that faces it," she says, daring to utter a thought that fellow critics mostly utter sotto voce.
January 22, 2008 The cut has become infected and a limb is in danger. Ben Bernanke is panicking and the Fed has its emergency triage team cutting rates... this time by 3/4%. ...

What should the Federal Reserve do now? Step back... and don't be so anxious to raise rates at the first sign of economic improvement.
Individuals and businesses need stability in their financial cost structures so that they can plan effectively and keep their ships afloat. Wildly fluctuating rates... regardless of what the absolute levels are... create problems. Either too much spending or too much fear. It's just not that difficult to comprehend. Why has it been so difficult for the Fed?

About Me

My photo
Michigan, United States
Air Force (SAC) captain 1968-72. Retired after 35 years of business and logistical planning, including running a small business. Two sons with advanced degrees; one with a business and pre-law degree. Beautiful wife who has put up with me for 4 decades. Education: B.A. (Sociology major; minors in philosopy, English literature, and German) M.S. Operations Management (like a mixture of an MBA with logistical planning)