Tag Archives: money

Puerto Rico Faces Bankruptcy: Watch YOUR Wallets

12 Wednesday Apr 2017

Posted by in Legal/Political Columns

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

A little less than a year ago I reported several times on Paul Ryan’s efforts to save banking profits by temporarily averting financial disaster in Puerto Rico. Then, I wrote:

May 24, 2016 I posted Paul Ryan Rescues Banksters, Globalists about Paul Ryan’s dastardly plans to force you (all of you) to pay Puerto Rico’s debts – all on behalf of the banksters of the world.

I said then:

The bailout will happen; consider it a done deal. Really $2 Billion or the whole $70 Billion is but a barely noticeable drop in the fed’s ocean of economic woe. Things like this add up though. When the whole system comes crashing down don’t count on the banksters to be found let alone lend a hand. They’re gathering the last of the cash (yours and mine) and preparing to flee. However, come hell or high water, the politicians will be easier to find. They’ll still expect to be re-elected. Remember this story and all the others. Hold them accountable or rinse and repeat with similar results.

U.S. Rep. Dave Brat (R-VA), who actually has a Ph.D. in economics, has caught on to the theft and deception:

“This makes the bill truly Orwellian — it remove[d] the consent of the Puerto Rican people and creates a fiefdom for unelected officials chosen by President Obama.

“As economist Thomas Sowell said, ‘The fatal attraction of government is that it allows busybodies to impose decisions on others without paying any price themselves.’ Congress can’t even get its own fiscal house in order, but [passed] a bill to solve Puerto Rico’s problems.

“This bill should [have been] subject to ratification by the Puerto Rican legislature or a vote from the Puerto Rican people. As it stands, I [opposed] PROMESA because it turns free citizens into subjects.”

He’s only talking about the loss of autonomy of the people of Puerto Rico; the rest of the American people will be losing their money. Pay up, subjects.

Temporary is almost over. The law passed and the wayward territory was given a year to get settlements in order. Like so much else Ryan touches, nothing has happened.

Bankruptcy for Puerto Rico is looking ever more likely as the clock ticks down toward a May 1 deadline to restructure $70 billion in debt, ramping up uncertainty for anyone betting on returns from the island’s widely held U.S. municipal bonds.

When U.S. Congress last year passed the Puerto Rico rescue law dubbed PROMESA, it froze creditor lawsuits against the island so its federally appointed oversight board and creditors could negotiate out of court on the biggest debt restructuring in U.S. municipal history.

The freeze expires on May 1, however, and an extension by Congress is “not going to happen,” said a Republican aide to the House Committee on Natural Resources, which is in charge of territory matters.

A round of mediated talks is scheduled to begin on Thursday. But absent an agreement soon, a growing number of analysts say Puerto Rico will seek protection from creditors under PROMESA’s court-sanctioned restructuring process, akin to U.S. bankruptcy.

Forbearance deals could let negotiations continue past May 1, but a source directly involved in the talks said avoiding an eventual bankruptcy is “impossible.”

Bankruptcy wouldn’t be the worst thing for P.R. In fact, it might be the best thing, here and now. It could give the people of the island room to decide if they want to continue their local fiasco. Hopefully, it will stay local and with them.

I have a funny feeling Congress won’t stand idly-by as the banks lose $70 Billion. Time will tell.

This case may serve as a canary in the economic coalmine. Watch and see what happens when governments default – more will surely follow.

This might be a good time to decide if P.R. should be granted sovereignty.

Might be a good look at the relationship between Congress and Wall Street.

It might be fun or funny, but probably not…

Perrin’s FY 2018 Federal Budget Review and Counter Analysis

16 Thursday Mar 2017

Posted by in Legal/Political Columns

≈ Comments Off on Perrin’s FY 2018 Federal Budget Review and Counter Analysis

Tags

, , , , ,

Totally. Out. Of. Control.

President Trump released his 2018 Budget Blueprint to MAGA yesterday.

See the Budget Blueprint HERE.

Well, it’s really a little more than 1/3 of the Budget, the “discretionary” spending. The other, majority, parts are essentially off-limits. Those are the “entitlements” – namely: Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

Here’s the big picture, courtesy of President Obama’s 2017 Budget, which is 99% accurate for comparison:

2017_pres_budget_total_spending_pie

National Priorities.

And that was not a true budget, a complete budget. Washington doesn’t do those anymore (unless Trump succeeds). Lately, for the past decade or so, “budgets” have been cobbled together from various separate spending proposals.

Another off-limits chunk is the interest on the federal debt – $303 Billion or 7% for 2017 – it will be much the same for 2018. So, that’s off-limits as is “health” and SSI.

Trump did do some seeming major cutting proposals for much of what’s left:

nimbus-image-1489709272214

NBC News.

That NBC chart looks pretty drastic. It seems horribly radical if you’re a liberal. It seems wonderfully radical if you’re a conservative. I’m neither (or both plus some [or minus some]) and it seems utterly unimpressive to me. Recall that those percentage cuts are each tied to numbers representing other percentages of the whole thing. The net effect is minimal. An explanation from the MAGA Budget 2018, page 49, Table 1 (Caps):

nimbus-image-1489709515787

White House / OMB (BS).

If trump has his way, discretionary spending will be $1.151 Billion for 2018, as opposed to $1.181 Billion in 2017 – a savings of $30 Billion (2.5% of 2017 totals). That’s a cut of .7% off the approximate total budget.

In other words, Trump has taken a fingernail file to a job fit for an axe or a chainsaw or some TNT…

I’m just not impressed … at all. Yes, this is a step in the right direction. Rather, it’s a slight turning of the foot for a small, baby step in that direction. The journey of 1,000 miles begins as such, kind of, sort of, maybe, a little…

Then again, I’m only one of 330 Million or so who resides inside the defunct borders of the Old Republic (maybe one of 270 Million or so actual Americans). I can’t vote on this and no one in power cares what I think. Therefore, I am liberated. I can give you my analysis and counter-proposal free from interference. Here goes:

Let’s imagine that I had dictatorial or god-like powers over the matter. Here’s how I might approach it:

Social Security – Not in the Constitution. Cut 100%. Gone. $1.4 Trillion saved.

Medicare/Medicaid – Not in the Constitution. Cut 100%. Gone. $1.2 Trillion saved.

Interest on the debt – The debt is based on Congress’s Satanic relationship with the Federal Reserve, all of which is contrary to the Constitution. As such, I would abolish the Fed. And I would repudiate and cancel 100% of the debt. In fact, I’d have a total debt Jubilee: all debts (public and private) totally erased. And I would make debt illegal. Usurious lending would be a capital felony. All interest payments eliminated. $.3 Trillion saved.

Military – The Constitution says they can have a standing army for 2 years. They’ve had one for 200 years. And it has nothing to do with Defense – all Offense and that is geared towards money-making for special interests and has nothing to do with “winning” anything. I’d cut it to around $100 Billion for 2018. After that, a 100% complete deletion as all air and land functions are turned over to the Several States and their Militias (or not). The Navy, actually provided for in Article I, I would also turn over to the States or to Privateers on a profit (or not) basis – (that’s how we ran off the British in large part and technology has come a long way since). $.5 Trillion saved.

Other discretionary – Not in the Constitution. Cut 100%. Gone. $.5 Trillion saved. And all unnecessary. The Dept. of Education educates no one. The Department of Energy produces no energy. The Treasury is little more than a middleman between the Fed and Goldman Sachs. The VA would not be needed without a Dept. of Offense. NASA did great things but the future is private space works. Earth existed for something like 4 Billion years without Dept. of the Interior management; odds are it could continue to do so. Etc. Etc. Etc. The States and private citizens could feel free to provide any “services” they thought lacking.

“Government” – It’s fascinating that the actual operation of the government is by far the smallest chunk of the government budget. It’s for the lights and heating for Congress, the White House, etc. With all those other programs eliminated, there would be nothing there to spend on. Therefore, I would completely eliminate that segment completely. Gone. $ saved.

You may have noticed that after one year I would completely eliminate the federal government. To entertain foreign leaders and for other, assorted buffoonery, the various Governors could rotate as “Head of State” in a lottery system.

I also would eliminate your mortgage, credit cards, student loans, etc. – an added bonus of my dictatorship.

Having finished so quickly, I would, like Cincinnatus, retire and return to the farm. I might light up a cigar. I might use this paper to start it:

nimbus-image-1489709965605

White House / OMB (BS).

Building a Wall Around my Museum

16 Thursday Mar 2017

Posted by in Legal/Political Columns

≈ Comments Off on Building a Wall Around my Museum

Tags

, , , ,

President Trump has proposed slashing the fire out of liberal-leaning arts programs:

President Donald Trump made good on a long-time conservative goal in his first proposed budget Thursday morning, targeting the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the National Endowments for the Arts and Humanities for complete elimination.

I suppose, if this is successful, it would put a kink in my Corvette Museum idea… Just when I was getting ready to submit my application. Figures…

admiral-blue

 

Did Someone Hit the Vodka too Hard?

09 Thursday Mar 2017

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on Did Someone Hit the Vodka too Hard?

Tags

, , , ,

Retired Russian colonel Viktor Baranetz wrote an entertaining article for Komsomolskaya Pravda: “Trump-Pump-Pump And Our Big Bang“. Baranetz seemed to have two main points, one thought-provoking and one off the wall nutty sounding.

“The U.S. is the permanent ‘world champion’ in the size of its military budget – almost $600 billion, which is 10 times more than Russias. Even if we add together the military budgets of the top ten countries in the world, they would not reach the American budget! Now it turns out that even that is not enough for Donald Trump. He intends to increase defense expenditure by $54 billion. This money would be enough to maintain five Polish armies. Or 10 Ukrainian ones.

“The American public is already grumbling at Trump, who prefers guns to butter. But cunning Trump understands what his trump card is: He is ‘buying’ the support of the army, as well as of military industry corporations. Former Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Army Yuri Baluyevsky is certain that ‘the idea to increase defense expenditure was presented to Trump by the U.S. military, who argue a lot about the power of the Russian army, realizing this is an opportunity to get new money.’ But how will Moscow react to the growing military budget of the U.S.? Baluyevsky answers: ‘Russia will not compete with the U.S. in defense expenditure. We are in a different weight class. For us, the main question is how to ensure Russia’s defense at a lower cost. I am sure that we have already found asymmetrical responses. I don’t see a big problem here.’

“What are these mysterious ‘asymmetrical responses’ that our politicians and generals speak about so often? Maybe it’s a myth or a pretty turn of phrase? No! Our asymmetrical response is nuclear warheads that can modify their course and height so that no computer can calculate their trajectory. Or, for example, the Americans are deploying their tanks, airplanes and special forces battalions along the Russian border. And we are quietly ‘seeding’ the U.S. shoreline with nuclear ‘mole’ missiles (they dig themselves in and ‘sleep’ until they are given the command)[…]

“Oh, it seems I’ve said too much. I should hold my tongue.

Point 1:

The U.S. spends a ridiculous sum on “defense”. He’s 100% correct here in all his statements. He merely confirmed those poll study results – the U.S., the most powerful nation, militarily, spends ten times as much as the second nation, Russia. If Trump gets the extra $54 Billion, then it will be nearly 11 times as much.

Not that it is defense-oriented. The military budget largely serves three purposes: money, money, and more money for the MIC; a jobs program, and; foreign intervention. It’s offense, not defense. The U.S. military was also the world’s largest in 2001 when they couldn’t even defend their own headquarters.

Defense spending is to Republicans what education spending is to Democrats. More spent after a certain point just means spending more. Ah, well, it’s just money.

Point 2:

The mole missiles. Either Brother Barabetz was be facetious or else he must have just come from the bar. While designing missiles that burrow into the seafloor and wait for “the command” must be technically possible, I suppose that, and implanting (seeding) them, would be exorbitantly expensive. Too much so for $60 Billion per year.

And I can’t see them being that effective if they were real. Essentially they would amount to underground nuclear explosions. Powerful, yes, but not nearly as powerful as a conventional in-air detonation. And they could likely only be deployed against non-military targets. I assume we could detect the seeding construction near one of our sub bases, for example.

They already have a similar but better system available – on their subs.

The “moles” seem as plausible as that 50s or 60s sci-fi movie wherein the Chinese dug an invasion tunnel to America through the center of the Earth.

nimbus-image-1489021646569

It is possible the man was talking about something real and using the ridiculous as a cover. When you’re outspent and out-gunned, asymmetrical warfare is an option. Something like the self-correcting trajectory is possible and plausible.

I also noticed the man talked about defending Russia. It’s cheaper to defend that to attack.

Anyway, maybe he had a triple at lunch and felt pretty good. Maybe he’s off the reservation. Maybe he’s on to something. Dunno. You?

 

ECON 666: Already Planning to Make the Next Recession Worse

03 Friday Mar 2017

Posted by in Legal/Political Columns

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

The Federal Reserve system is truly amazing.

Built, in secret in a dark room at Jekyll Island, Georgia, it was foisted on the American people more than 100 years ago. It is patently illegal; Congress abdicated its Article I authority to control the currency to a private, unelected, and uncontrollable bank. It destroyed the value of the dollar. It necessitated the 16th Amendment and the income tax (as a prop).

It institutionalized the normal business (boom, bust, boom,…) cycle – privatizing the gains and socializing the loses. It allows for concentration of wealth in the dirty hands of a few bankers and closely associated persons. It places all responsibility and liability on the public. It allows for unlimited government: spending, debt, programs, and wars. It works in conjunction with other central banks and the Bank for International Settlements to maintain a global system of debt slavery.

That this greatest and most evil of ponzi schemes has lasted for 104 years is a testament to either the wiles of its creators and operators or to the blind stupidity of the people. It could be both. And it could signal the completely corrupted nature of the American political class. None of it unfathomable…

Those who rule the economy like gods, even in the midst of preparing for a likely transition in leadership next February, are already plotting and planning their actions for the next American recession:

While in recent weeks there has been a material increase in Fed balance sheet normalization chatter, according to a new report from Deutsche Bank analysts, it may all be for nothing for one simple reason: should the US encounter a recession in the next several years, the most likely reaction by the Fed would be another $1 trillion in QE, delaying indefinitely any expectations for a return to a “normal” balance sheet.

As a reminder, as of this month, the duration of the latest expansionary cycle – as defined by the NBER – has reached 93 months, surpassing the 92 months of the 1982-1990 cycle, and is now the third longest in history. Should the cycle persist for another 27 months, or just under two and a half years, it would be the longest period of “economic growth” in history.

It’s like they know. Like they do this on purpose. “QE”means quantitative easing. That’s fancy banker talk for printing money. In this case, the U.S. Treasury will announce a sale of $1 Trillion in federal bonds. That’s more debt and interest for the taxpayers to work off. The Fed will then “expand its balance sheet” by buying the Treasuries. These are on sale at the Treasury but the Fed will buy them through their favorite middleman, Goldman Sachs.

Goldman will mark up the price, to give the people the worst deal possible and to make a profit. Goldman will finance the initial purchase from the Treasury with a fake money loan from guess who… And how will the Fed obtain the money for the Goldman loan and for the secondary Treasury purchase? By printing money! A lot of money. $1 Trillion for Goldman. And $1 Trillion plus Goldman fees for the Fed. Wait. There’s more (and more and more): the Treasury and the government now have an extra Trillion. That’s the multiplier effect. $3 Trillion+ in extra fake money in circulation.

I do not know what Goldman’s markup is. Let’s say it’s 10%. So $3.1 Trillion is created out of thin air. Poof! The money came from nowhere but it still has an effect. And it has to be paid for despite not being real.

The government gets to spend their Trillion in debt immediately – on war, healthcare, a mission to Mars – literally the sky is the limit (or space). Later the taxpayers will pay that back to the Fed, with interest (on money that never existed). Goldman will instantly pay off its $1 Trillion loan from the Fed through the subsequent sale to the Fed. They keep their 10% – $100 Billion! Good to be them.

Now the Fed will have on the crooked books: the asset of the Treasuries, and: the liability for the $1.1 Trillion to buy them. The balance went to Goldman, remember. Given enough time and hard work and sweat from the taxpaying saps, this liability and associated asset would balance out – back to zero. But, in the meantime, the Fed has that $1 Trillion asset just sitting there! They won’t let it go to waste.

They will use it as an asset to loan more fake money to more commercial banks (in America and abroad). More multiplying. More debt based on something that doesn’t exist.

All of this excess fake money floating around drives down the value of existing money – Gresham’s Law. This makes the taxpayer’s hard-earned money – that little money they’re allowed to keep when not repaying debt and interest via taxes on loans that never really existed – less valuable even as the prices of the things they must buy rise (monetary inflation). In other words, while the globalist instantly profit, the taxpayers take it in both ends for the duration.

Yes, even as the banks instantly get richer for doing nothing, the people get poorer. And this crazed debt cycle runs parallel to the usual business cycle (boom, bust, growth, contraction, …) until the next recession, depression, or downturn – when it will all be repeated.

That’s partly the nature of these bars on the graph from Zero Hedge:

expansion-duration

We’re at the end of the red bar (2009-present). That’s supposed to be a boom market or good times. For most they haven’t felt so good. And that’s because the people have struggled with the debt and inflation and lose of buying power from the last round of QE, circa 2008-09.

Cozy, huh? This cycle will keep repeating until the economy totally collapses or until the people finally wake up and rise up (or both).

From the graph one can also see we are, by historical average, overdue for a recession right now.

Additionally from the graph one might catch a glimpse of the Depression of 1921. It was the one immediately prior to the Great Depression. And it only lasted for six months. That’s because it was the last major depression/recession before the Fed really got the game up and running.

Cycles naturally come and go. They naturally correct themselves in very rapid fashion. It takes a central bank and a government, working together, to prolong their effects – and to build upon the cycle for the next time.

It seems the next time is coming and the criminals are already planning for it. If you don’t mind flirting with utter disaster and if you’re not ready to wake up yet, then at least heed the warnings. They’ve already told you so. If you’re caught off guard, that’s on you. Hell, it’s all going to be on you anyway…

Train Your Replacement so We can Fire You

02 Thursday Mar 2017

Posted by in News and Notes

≈ Comments Off on Train Your Replacement so We can Fire You

Tags

, , , , ,

Just yesterday I wrote of the Diminishing Value of Degrees and the fact that major companies no longer require them. It seems private companies aren’t the only ones feeling that way; public universities are joining on.

At the University of California’s San Francisco campus, 79 IT employees lost their jobs this week, some of them after explaining to their replacements at Indian outsourcing firm HCL how to do their jobs.

The union representing the employees, University Professional and Technical Employees CWA Local 9119, says it’s the first time a public university has offshored American IT jobs.

In a statement sent yesterday, UPTE-CWA says the layoffs could spread, since the HCL contract can be utilized by any of the 10 campuses in the University of California system, the nation’s largest public university. “US taxes should be used to create jobs in the US, not in other countries,” said Kurt Ho, a systems administrator who was quoted in the union’s press release. Ho was required to train his replacement as a condition of getting his severance pay.

In its statement on the matter, UCSF says that it was pushed to hire outside contractors due to “increased demand for information technology and escalating costs for these services.” The university says it will save more than $30 million by hiring HCL, after seeing IT costs nearly triple between 2011 and 2016, “driven by the introduction of the electronic medical record and increased digital connectivity.”

6a00d834516a5769e200e551d2f40f8833-800wi

Career Hub Blog.

The old, temporarily somewhat true story went like this: go to a “good” school; get a degree there; use the degree to get a “good” job; work there for 30-40 years; retire happy in Florida. That’s no longer true at all, even at the “good” schools, the places that confer the degrees.

UCSF terminated skilled, dedicated, degreed American professionals in favor of who-knows-the skills?, who-knows-the language H-1B immigrants (or remotes). All to save a few dollars. Odds are, this plan will backfire, with the replacements costing much more in repetition, poor communication, failed systems, and other problems.

Look for this to spread, especially at the hypocritical schools. Tuition is higher than ever and rising. Presidents, administrators, and football coaches are paid like royalty. But there’s no money… And no jobs. Even with one of those trusty degrees.

I wonder what the students in the UCSF Computer Sciences Department, where they’re “Computing for a better tomorrow“, think? Tomorrow,who knows. Today doesn’t look so hot.

The Screws Tighten: Cashing Us Out

14 Tuesday Feb 2017

Posted by in Legal/Political Columns, News and Notes

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , , ,

All is well on Wall Street. Goldman Sachs Steven Mnuchin has been confirmed as Treasury Secretary. Janet Yellen is up to something. It’s all good for them. And that’s what really matters. The government and its banking owners get complete discretion to do whatever they please. And they are utterly unaccountable to anyone (impossibly improbable war of righteous vengeance aside).

For you, it’s a different story. You must be controlled in everything you do and at all times. And the controls are coming for your cash money, for the money itself, for you.

The time will come when you won’t be able to buy a cup of coffee without being traced, warns investment guru Jim Rogers. To control people, governments will increasingly seek to hunt down cash spending, he adds.

“Governments are always looking out for themselves first, and it’s the same old thing that has been going on for hundreds of years

…

“When it’s done, the governments are going to be very, very happy they are going to say they’re doing it for our own good, this is not them, this is for our good. That they’re doing this, but it’s coming, and it’s going to be a whole different world in which we live. Probably we are not going to have as many freedoms as we have now even though we are already losing our freedoms at a significant pace,” Rodgers told the radio.

It’s not really your money. All money belongs to the Big Club. They just let you borrow it, in very small amounts, for a time. But the anonymity of cash bothers them. They want you on a digital leash. And that’s exactly what’s coming. Leashed like animals “for your own good”.

digital-currency-wealth-confiscation-made-easy-622x415

Sovereign Investor.

The saddest part is that most people won’t just accept this, they’ll probably demand it.

Me? I’m thinking it may almost be time to water Jefferson’s tree.

Funding the Status Quo

07 Tuesday Feb 2017

Posted by in Legal/Political Columns

≈ Comments Off on Funding the Status Quo

Tags

, , , , ,

Billionaire globalist George Soros, his funds and foundation, have garnered recent news for funding immigrant causes, BLM, and the various violent Rent-A-Mobs de jure. It seems he also funds a far more dangerous element:

Records: Soros Fund Execs Funded Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, John McCain, John Kasich, Lindsey Graham in 2016

Soros Fund Management, a former hedge fund that serves now as an investment management firm, was founded by progressive billionaire George Soros in 1969. It has risen to become one of the most profitable hedge funds in the industry. Employees of the firm are heavily involved in backing political candidates giving millions upon millions to groups that were supporting failed 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton for the presidency.

But more importantly, perhaps, than the unsurprising giant lump sums of cash funneled into Democratic Party and Clinton coffers is the revelation thanks to the Center for Responsive Politics that employees of the Soros firm—now run by his son Robert Soros—pumped tens of thousands of dollars into the campaigns of top anti-Trump Republicans over the course of 2016.

In total, executives with the Soros-founded company pushed $36,800 into the coffers of these GOP candidates just this past cycle. That does not include Super PACs or campaign committees, which saw tens of thousands of dollars more. While these numbers for Republicans pale in comparison to the millions upon millions poured into Democratic groups, causes, and candidates, it is significant that Soros executives are making a play inside the GOP. Perhaps even more significant is the type of Republican they aim to prop up: pro-amnesty, pro-open borders on trade, and generally speaking anti-Trump. A pattern emerges when looking at the policies of the Republicans that these Soros Fund Management executives support financially.

It males perfect sense. Manipulators have always backed both (multiple) sides in any event or conflict so as to maintain some control no matter the ultimate outcome. And it makes sense that the same man who funds violent criminals and invaders also pays for even bigger criminals in D.C.

dirty-money

Nonprofit Quarterly.

Just let this serve as a reminder that almost no mainstream politicians are beyond being bought and paid for. Soros wields far more power in any of these circles than you or I. The Big Club, George Carlin called it. It’s real.

Are Employees a Thing of the Past? Probably

02 Thursday Feb 2017

Posted by in News and Notes, Other Columns

≈ Comments Off on Are Employees a Thing of the Past? Probably

Tags

, , ,

So hints the Wall Street Journal today, in an excellent, thought-provoking article by Lauren Weber. The gist of the matter is that large corporations across the country are doing everything they can to cut labor costs. This means, for now, outsourcing, independent contractors, other contractors, temps, and freelancers. I took away three things from the article.

First, it’s absolutely true. Employers no longer wish to employ employees. Read the material and look at the graphs. Consult Google – or your own employment experiences. I’ve talked about this before. James Altucher regularly says the same things. It’s happening (or happened).

And it is not, in and of itself, a bad thing. Yes, “traditional” career jobs are harder to come by, vanishing, in fact. But they were a relatively new phenomenon anyway. The 40 hours a week for 40 years thing came along some time in the industrial revolution. Before that people either worked in small businesses, worked for themselves, or grew crops. Things changed. They’ll change again.

Ms. Weber looks into the desperation (and greed) of some of these job-cutting companies. She also looks at the downside(s) for displaced employees (several of those). What jumped out at me, my second take-away, was this:

Some economists liken the strategy to Hollywood studios, which greenlight movies and then hire directors, actors, editors, special-effects teams and marketing agencies for production. All those outsiders work together to deliver the movie, but the studio has no long-term obligations after the film’s release.

This, I see as the silver lining. The silver screen lining, we’ll wittily call it. The directors, actors, editors, effects, and marketing people of Hollywood clean up – at least for the big films and productions. The actors get the fame so I’ll concentrate on them. Jennifer Lawrence (who is so hot) doesn’t care if a movie is a one-time contract gig because she gets $10 Million for her part. She likely also negotiates residual income from it as well.

Actors can command these sums (some of them) and dictate some terms because the have value. They have it, they know it, and they sell it.

This may be the short-term future of employment. Gerry Spence once wrote (and I cannot remember in which excellent book…) that he hoped some day people would be paid based on their talents. He hoped the employees could dictate their own terms. Big business had that reversed for years; society came to accept it – for most jobs. The actors did not. They sold their talent for what it was worth – what people would pay for it within market limits.

Hopefully this trend will spread outside of Hollywood and Burbank. Whoever you are, whatever you do, you have talent and value. Use it. For now. I say “for now” because of the third thing that jumped out at me, the 800-pound mechanical gorilla in the room:

BNY Chairman and CEO Gerald Hassell vowed to “drive down the labor component of our company” with technology that can perform tasks currently done by people. Other companies view contracting as a stopgap until more jobs are automated, freeing firms to dispense with some workers altogether.

The robots are not coming. They’re here now. And they’re getting “better” every day. What’s coming is their revolution. Right now there are very few jobs which cannot be performed by some android, bot, or AI. In a few years (years, not decades) it will be virtually 100% of the jobs. The decades part will fully round out the 100%. 0 humans needed at that point. And that means 0 jobs. Which means 0 pay. Which will make it a little difficult to pay for the goods and services the bots produce.

TERMINATOR GENISYS

The new boss may not be a people person. May not be a person. Paramount Pictures and Skydance Productions.

This can of worms is open and we’re all getting into it (look – there’s one crawling on your ankle right now). This revolution will either be the greatest thing to ever happen to humanity, one of the absolute worst, or the very last. Fun will be had by all…

Regulating the Regulations, 2 for 1 Analysis

31 Tuesday Jan 2017

Posted by in Legal/Political Columns

≈ Comments Off on Regulating the Regulations, 2 for 1 Analysis

Tags

, , , , ,

A friend and loyal reader from Facebook (one of half a dozen, maybe less!) posted the following in response to my little blurb on the 2 for 1 cuttings in the CFR forest:

This idea came from the Canadians. When I first heard about the Canadian 2for1, it sounded great. Then, I read that they had the caveat “2 regulations of equal or greater impact”. Well, right there, is wiggle room for administrators. There must be hundreds of thousands on the books, some of them perhaps dealing with standard Conestoga wagon sizes. Not sure if Trumps EO contains this caveat.

Not, that I’m against the idea. A long time ago, I advocated for capping city regulations at (say) 200. You add one, and remove one. So think carefully.

Thanks, Pat! Great points, all. I didn’t look into the Canadian angle (the land of Maple and Hockey scares me…). I know Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia (a DEMOCRAT, for some of my other FB peeps) essentially proposed the exact same thing a few years back. This Order, which I’ll get to in a second, is ostensibly aimed at two things: easing the burden on businesses and citizens, and; controlling the admin budget.

nimbus-image-1485911565458

The White House.

Pat nailed it with the “wiggle room for administrators” part. That’s the name of the game in quasi-legislative admin law land. When I practiced law, I batted 1,000 in regulatory cases (hearings and litigation). Never lost a case. Federal, state, and local. 100% wins.

How? Because the entire system is bullsh!t. And no-one knows what the hell any of it means. And because I just happened to be especially good at that type of BS. Just say random things, reference a reg., and sound authoritative.

The people in charge of the agencies make a living wiggling around like that. They literally make this crap up as they go. By the way, 200 is nice, but I would cap the federal regs at 0. At least insofar as they apply to the people. I suppose they have copious pages of internal operating procedures. I don’t care how they schedule desk duty for signing for the Fed Ex man. Their business. It’s our business I worry about. And I think Trump shares the sentiment. His Order (in full):

Presidential Executive Order on Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs

EXECUTIVE ORDER

– – – – – – –

REDUCING REGULATION AND CONTROLLING REGULATORY COSTS

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921, as amended (31 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.), section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Purpose. It is the policy of the executive branch to be prudent and financially responsible in the expenditure of funds, from both public and private sources. In addition to the management of the direct expenditure of taxpayer dollars through the budgeting process, it is essential to manage the costs associated with the governmental imposition of private expenditures required to comply with Federal regulations. Toward that end, it is important that for every one new regulation issued, at least two prior regulations be identified for elimination, and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently managed and controlled through a budgeting process.

Sec. 2. Regulatory Cap for Fiscal Year 2017. (a) Unless prohibited by law, whenever an executive department or agency (agency) publicly proposes for notice and comment or otherwise promulgates a new regulation, it shall identify at least two existing regulations to be repealed.

(b) For fiscal year 2017, which is in progress, the heads of all agencies are directed that the total incremental cost of all new regulations, including repealed regulations, to be finalized this year shall be no greater than zero, unless otherwise required by law or consistent with advice provided in writing by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (Director).

(c) In furtherance of the requirement of subsection (a) of this section, any new incremental costs associated with new regulations shall, to the extent permitted by law, be offset by the elimination of existing costs associated with at least two prior regulations. Any agency eliminating existing costs associated with prior regulations under this subsection shall do so in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act and other applicable law.

(d) The Director shall provide the heads of agencies with guidance on the implementation of this section. Such guidance shall address, among other things, processes for standardizing the measurement and estimation of regulatory costs; standards for determining what qualifies as new and offsetting regulations; standards for determining the costs of existing regulations that are considered for elimination; processes for accounting for costs in different fiscal years; methods to oversee the issuance of rules with costs offset by savings at different times or different agencies; and emergencies and other circumstances that might justify individual waivers of the requirements of this section. The Director shall consider phasing in and updating these requirements.

Sec. 3. Annual Regulatory Cost Submissions to the Office of Management and Budget. (a) Beginning with the Regulatory Plans (required under Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993, as amended, or any successor order) for fiscal year 2018, and for each fiscal year thereafter, the head of each agency shall identify, for each regulation that increases incremental cost, the offsetting regulations described in section 2(c) of this order, and provide the agency’s best approximation of the total costs or savings associated with each new regulation or repealed regulation.

(b) Each regulation approved by the Director during the Presidential budget process shall be included in the Unified Regulatory Agenda required under Executive Order 12866, as amended, or any successor order.

(c) Unless otherwise required by law, no regulation shall be issued by an agency if it was not included on the most recent version or update of the published Unified Regulatory Agenda as required under Executive Order 12866, as amended, or any successor order, unless the issuance of such regulation was approved in advance in writing by the Director.

(d) During the Presidential budget process, the Director shall identify to agencies a total amount of incremental costs that will be allowed for each agency in issuing new regulations and repealing regulations for the next fiscal year. No regulations exceeding the agency’s total incremental cost allowance will be permitted in that fiscal year, unless required by law or approved in writing by the Director. The total incremental cost allowance may allow an increase or require a reduction in total regulatory cost.

(e) The Director shall provide the heads of agencies with guidance on the implementation of the requirements in this section.

Sec. 4. Definition. For purposes of this order the term “regulation” or “rule” means an agency statement of general or particular applicability and future effect designed to implement, interpret, or prescribe law or policy or to describe the procedure or practice requirements of an agency, but does not include:

(a) regulations issued with respect to a military, national security, or foreign affairs function of the United States;

(b) regulations related to agency organization, management, or personnel; or

(c) any other category of regulations exempted by the Director.

Sec. 5. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

DONALD J. TRUMP

THE WHITE HOUSE,
January 30, 2017.

I didn’t see anything in there that jumped out, overtly, as picking or minimizing impact based on value. I did, however, note the afore-mentioned items.

The first is found in Sec. 1. The CFR creates an insane burden on people and companies. Forced (at gun point) compliance is one of the three (non martial) ways the government dominates all life on Earth (the others being taxation and inflation). In his former business life I’m sure Trump spent years and hundreds of millions of dollars complying with these things. Thus, he wants, upfront and in writing, to aim protection at those who suffer – the People.

Second, he wants to reign in the federal budget, much of which is consumed by regulatory expenditures. How much? Don’t know. A LOT! The rest of the Order repeatedly talks about cutting costs. There’s nothing stating “Canadian” equal or greater impact. However, that is hinted at. It would make fiscal sense to do away with the most costly regs first from a budget standpoint.

However, I do not see that as a limit here – just a strong suggestion. Even if that became standard operating procedure, cutting so as to be revenue neutral, it would go a long way towards halting the cancerous growth of the administrative budget. And that’s its own issue in the Order.

Right now there is no independent assessment of the regulatory budget. There never has been. The closest we have is a lumping together of these expenses in the annual budget Bill summaries. And the clowns in Congress haven’t put together a complete budget in ten years! They are literally spending our money willy-nilly.

Trump’s Order directs annual expenses to the OMB. He’s telling them to publish a budget if they want one considered. And he’s telling them to cut the associated costs. It’s far from perfect but this is the best thing I’ve seen on the subject, maybe ever.

Setting aside the blatant fact that nearly 100% of all regulations represent illegal abdication of Congressional legislative authority. (Where’s the DOE or the other DOE or the DOC in the Constitution? Where’s the rule-making authority? Don’t look; it’s none of it in there). Setting that aside, the program is wildly expensive, inside and out of D.C.

I’m not looking through pie charts for a breakdown but I safely guess the total budgetary bill for all these agencies and their rules is on the order of $200 Billion. Per year. The total expense outside of the government, the cost of complying with these illegal fiat-laws is probably on the order of $1 Trillion per year. That’s $1 Trillion better left in the general economy – 20 million, $50,000 a year jobs, for example.

The size and scope of the CFR is truly baffling. I wasn’t too far off calling it a minor planet. In its infancy, in 1960, it stood in around 23,000 pages. By 1975 it was up to 71,000 pages. Now it’s closing in on 200,000 pages across 50 Titles. The index alone is 1,100 pages long – about the size of a large dictionary, the Bible, or The Lord of the Rings. Obama added over 17,000 pages in his first five years in office.

Assume one to two pages per regulation and you’ve got a whole sh!t-ton of BS to wiggle through – or pay for.

Some feebly argue these regulations “protect” people. The children, the crippled, the downtrodden, etc. Were none of these people protected in 1975? 1960? The answer is “yes” and, back then,they had jobs because businesses didn’t divert as much cash to satisfying this forest of craziness. And believe it or not, people existed, thrived, and were “protected” before any of this started. How else did people survive long enough to witness the creation of the “protective” agencies which are killing them?

Ryan Young wrote a piece on the 2 for 1 parings for the Competitive Enterprise Institute yesterday. It’s worth a read as is much of their information (where some of my numbers herein came from).

However this may work out one thing is certain: there is plenty of material to work with. Oil that chainsaw, Mr. Trump.