The Leopard's Limb 07/28/11 (leftovers, off-topics, whatever)

Word watch
An NBC reporter used the phrase "since the stock market tanked" in a report to anchor Brian Williams.

The budget ordeal
I emailed Virginia Foxx' office yesterday, urging her to support a compromise and get something passed before we default. I pointed out that one of the lesser, but still bad, consequences of default will be the subsequent reinstallation of Nancy Pelosi as Speaker in 2013.

I may follow up the email today with a phone call (I'm advised that phone calls carry more weight--I sit to be corrected about that, however). The Boehner bill being thrashed about in the House is simply political posturing that will go nowhere in the Senate.

From the keyboard of the Leopard
Poster O. T. Rush weighed in last night in the Wednesday LTE's re the debt/deficit. His remarks are worthy of comments, thus I'm reposting it:

One of the biggest problems that we have regarding money in this country is that many of those who choose to comment, including quite a few in the Congress, have a serious vocabulary problem.

They use the terms deficit and debt interchangeably, simply because they don't know any better.

The DEBT is the total of all the money that the nation owes.

The DEFICIT is the amount that we are short each year between income and outgo. The annual deficit, of course, adds to the total debt, but they are far from being the same thing.

The average American homeowner carries a debt to earnings ratio of about 5-1. The USA carries a ratio of about 1-1. As has been pointed out by many real experts, the USA could easily carry a higher ratio. But it would be better if homeowners and the USA carried much lower ratios.

For the USA, the long-term debt is a problem, but nothing can be done to lower it until the deficit is dealt with. So debt is a low priority item at the moment.

If, instead of listening to the hysterical voices of those running for office in 2012, you listen to people who have no horse in the race, but actually know a lot more about economics...say David Stockman and the British magazine "The Economist", you will find that they agree on what needs to be done, keeping in mind that many of the "ideas" of the most hysterical voices would do serious, if not fatal, damage to the fragile US economy.

There are two necessary elements:

1. Cut spending. That is a given. Of course, as pointed out above, there the devil is in the details.

2. Increase revenue. That is a must, because the deficit cannot be substantially reduced by spending cuts alone without destroying any hope of economic recovery. There are two necessary elements for increasing revenue:
a. Increase taxes. That is not optional. Again, the devil is in the details, but it has to be done. Those who     still recite the old mantra that increasing taxes reduces jobs are living in the discredited past. We know it isn't so.
b. Increase the number of jobs. That means that the national economy must be prodded into a healthier mode. How that is to be done is a matter for debate. But consider this.

After 12 years of corruption and neglect by three different presidents created and then deepened the Great Depression (Hoover was not individually responsible for the depression, but his doing nothing for three years made it worse), FDR was advised to try to spend his way out. That, of course, created a fire storm of opposition, which limited the amount of spending that FDR was able to do.
Most legitimate economic historians now say that that was the biggest problem, that FDR should have spent more, which probably would have ended the depression before the outbreak of WW II and even might have prevented that great disaster.

It would be interesting to see what might happen if the American people and their so-called leaders started learning and thinking rather than just reacting to the Chicken Little mentality of the moment.

More from the Leopard
O. T. furnishes more grist for the mill, with a reply to another of our excellent posters, whitewall:

"We will replace that over matched empty suit Marxist front man in thw White House and add a dozen TEA Party type freshmen Senators to the US Senate at the same time as well ad a few more in the House."

As to Whitewall's comment, I am LMAO. Whitewall usually seems to be a reasonable man. But this comment is coming from out of far left field in la la land.

Just who does he think is going to win the office of President for the GOP? After the other GOP candidates destroy Romney for his religious beliefs, there will be three left: Bachmann, Perry and Palin. Does Whitewall seriously believe that any sane voter would choose any of those idiots?

I know Stab has already said that he will not vote for Obama. Since I know for sure that he is not an idiot, I assume that he means that he will vote for the Libertarian candidate, or do a write-in.

Besides, today I saw my first Obama 2012 bumper sticker. Obama is already at least a year ahead of whoever gets the GOP nomination. His people are going door to door, right now, in our town and in thousands of towns across the country. The only question remaining is how much Obama will win by.

As to the "TT Party" (Mommy, I've got to TT), they have had their innings and wasted them on frivolous, symbolic stuff that has failed to advance their or the nation's cause. Anyone who expects them to increase their numbers in either Washington or Raleigh is guilty of "California Dreamin'" as the Mommas and the Poppas put it.

If Bachmann, who is currently #2 in the GOP 2012 polls, gets the nomination, we will be lucky if there is anything left of the GOP after election day 2012.

The American people can be slow and obtuse, but they are most definitely not stupid.