Curt Doolittle

Theme: Crisis

  • What Policies Have Helped The U.s. Come Out Of Recession While Europe Has Failed To Do So?

    In simplest terms, none.  No policies made the difference. The reason the US began (and has now stopped) coming out of recession, and europe has continued to decline, is that in europe, the protestant germanic states are unwilling to subsidize the catholic mediterranean states.  In the USA, this same  anti-subsidy conflict is conducted along racial and urban rather than national lines. The difference is, that in the USA, we are powerless to stop that subsidy because the monetary and fiscal power is centralized, and the government can inflate away debt across all people, whereas in europe the EU cannot inflate debt away because the monetary (central) and fiscal power (local) is separated.  However, there is very little difference in practice. In the States we are a polarized society, and in Europe they are a polarized society.  So, the difference in the duration of the recessions is structural, not one of policy.  This is why the left economists favor centralization and the right economists favor breakup of the eurozone by german exit: its a moral conflict.

    https://www.quora.com/What-policies-have-helped-the-U-S-come-out-of-recession-while-Europe-has-failed-to-do-so

  • “The nation is burdened with the heavy curse on those who come afterwards. The g

    “The nation is burdened with the heavy curse on those who come afterwards. The generation before us was inspired by an activism and a naive enthusiasm, which we cannot rekindle, because we confront tasks of a different kind from those which our fathers faced.”

    THERE IS NO WE. AN EMPIRE IS NOT A NATION.

    Source date (UTC): 2012-06-30 09:38:00 UTC

  • exit is the best answer

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/27/opinion/to-save-the-euro-germany-must-leave-it.htmlGerman exit is the best answer.

    Source date (UTC): 2012-06-27 15:12:00 UTC

  • COWEN GETS ON BOARD: THE PUBLIC HAS LOST FAITH IN GOVERNMENT i’ve been harping o

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/17/business/broken-trust-takes-time-to-mend-economic-view.htmlTYLER COWEN GETS ON BOARD: THE PUBLIC HAS LOST FAITH IN GOVERNMENT

    i’ve been harping on this for the past few years, particularly on Krugman’s, Mark Thoma’s and Karl Smith’s blogs (the left). I don’t think it’s going to change any time soon. It’s good to see a prominent economist getting on board.

    MY argument has been that the Keynesians are right in that increasing demand will work to stimulate the economy, but that people will not tolerate government spending because of the perceived cost of the expansion of invasive, and often privileged, government.

    As such, rather than offer spending solutions (as does Krugman) the answer is to suggest programs in monetary policy, fiscal policy, industrial policy and education policy, so that all sides get what they want without the expansion of the state. Only this method will work. The conservatives (in my view, rightly) will block anything else, and they have the voter support to block spending programs.

    As far back as 2006, I suggested that the power grid was the most important structural investment that we could make that would both generate a large number of jobs and provide a reasonable return on the investment. I suggested paying down mortgages directly as the most important vehicle for creating stimulus. I agreed with Karl Smith that we should give an extended tax holiday and borrow at such low rates to pay for it. And among other things, I suggested various forms of industrial policy, particularly technology bonuses for achieving strategic investment objectives. I recommended either privatizing education using a voucher system or eliminating the DofEd and giving principles hire and fire authority and the ability to experiment. These factors would create enough stimulus to move the economy. But more importantly, these kinds of spending do not expand the state, or favor urban voters at the expense of suburban and rural voters.

    At the very least the conversation would be productive, commercially and socially engaging.

    But the keynesians actually block it by harping on the spending tactic exclusively.

    Source date (UTC): 2012-06-17 21:39:00 UTC

  • Political Movements: How Globally Influential Are Nazi And Fascist Factions?

    ( Pretty bad answers so far. I’ll try to help. )

    I can speak to the US, UK, Germany and Greece, all of whom have  active movements at present — with England’s two groups currently the most activist and noticeable.  Although in Greece, the degree of stress and the Greek problem of Turkish immigration into Europe (akin to Mexican in the states) is the fuel for an rapidly expanding movement.

    The fascist (Nazi) movements consist largely of working class males.  In these countries, the movements generally expand during times of economic duress.  This is because of a variety of factors but largely that these males are displaced by competition from immigrants.  (There is some suspicion but not good data, that it is driven by difficulties in finding mates as well, since mates are a status symbol.) Their concern in this regard is not without merit, really.  In their view, they tow the social line, adhere to rules and norms, and are not rewarded for it, and instead are displaced both economically and socially. So they see society as ‘unfair’ to them.

    These movements are not large. In the single digits of suport. (Although in the UK they have managed to capture of few seats recently.  But because these movements are vocal and somewhat frightening, they get a lot of press. Consequently, the governments tend to be highly concerned about them. In no small part because they are subgroups of a supposedly social majority that is not satisfied with the state of affairs, thus invalidating the existing government, and posing a threat to the dominant political ideology.  It’s probably useful to keep in mind that a) chaos and loss of faith in a government can occur more easily in a country than we assume  b) a revolution only requires that five to ten percent of a population be united and willing to deploy violence in some organized fashion. So it is not irrational to take these groups seriously if they have any chance of getting above five percent support of the population.

    But in real terms they are not so much politically influential as they are a measure of dissatisfaction that is so great that it is driving some percentage of the population to advocate violent change to the status quo.  Their very presence is a meaningful yardstick.

    https://www.quora.com/Political-Movements-How-globally-influential-are-Nazi-and-fascist-factions

  • Political Movements: How Globally Influential Are Nazi And Fascist Factions?

    ( Pretty bad answers so far. I’ll try to help. )

    I can speak to the US, UK, Germany and Greece, all of whom have  active movements at present — with England’s two groups currently the most activist and noticeable.  Although in Greece, the degree of stress and the Greek problem of Turkish immigration into Europe (akin to Mexican in the states) is the fuel for an rapidly expanding movement.

    The fascist (Nazi) movements consist largely of working class males.  In these countries, the movements generally expand during times of economic duress.  This is because of a variety of factors but largely that these males are displaced by competition from immigrants.  (There is some suspicion but not good data, that it is driven by difficulties in finding mates as well, since mates are a status symbol.) Their concern in this regard is not without merit, really.  In their view, they tow the social line, adhere to rules and norms, and are not rewarded for it, and instead are displaced both economically and socially. So they see society as ‘unfair’ to them.

    These movements are not large. In the single digits of suport. (Although in the UK they have managed to capture of few seats recently.  But because these movements are vocal and somewhat frightening, they get a lot of press. Consequently, the governments tend to be highly concerned about them. In no small part because they are subgroups of a supposedly social majority that is not satisfied with the state of affairs, thus invalidating the existing government, and posing a threat to the dominant political ideology.  It’s probably useful to keep in mind that a) chaos and loss of faith in a government can occur more easily in a country than we assume  b) a revolution only requires that five to ten percent of a population be united and willing to deploy violence in some organized fashion. So it is not irrational to take these groups seriously if they have any chance of getting above five percent support of the population.

    But in real terms they are not so much politically influential as they are a measure of dissatisfaction that is so great that it is driving some percentage of the population to advocate violent change to the status quo.  Their very presence is a meaningful yardstick.

    https://www.quora.com/Political-Movements-How-globally-influential-are-Nazi-and-fascist-factions

  • What Happened To Occupy Wall Street?

    OWS and The tea party are both likely to be long term phenomena caused by structural changes in the USA, and in the world economy.

    OWS still exists as a movement of sorts, but declined for two reasons:
    1) A failure to develop a platform of specific actions.  Movements need policy objectives and they didn’t propose them.  And leadership never emerged that could drive and negotiate them.
    2) The behavior of the members was deemed unacceptable:  In the 60’s the underclasses were emerging as a numeric force sufficient to create both a political and consumer class. Further, their behavior was a rejection of the war, the postwar strategic nuclear threats, and the rigidity of their parent’s disciplined ‘war’ generation.  These other factors are not in play at this time, so while the movement succeeded in propagating the 1% message, they discredited themselves by what the majority consider ‘uncivic’ behavior.

    https://www.quora.com/What-happened-to-Occupy-Wall-Street

  • What Happened To Occupy Wall Street?

    OWS and The tea party are both likely to be long term phenomena caused by structural changes in the USA, and in the world economy.

    OWS still exists as a movement of sorts, but declined for two reasons:
    1) A failure to develop a platform of specific actions.  Movements need policy objectives and they didn’t propose them.  And leadership never emerged that could drive and negotiate them.
    2) The behavior of the members was deemed unacceptable:  In the 60’s the underclasses were emerging as a numeric force sufficient to create both a political and consumer class. Further, their behavior was a rejection of the war, the postwar strategic nuclear threats, and the rigidity of their parent’s disciplined ‘war’ generation.  These other factors are not in play at this time, so while the movement succeeded in propagating the 1% message, they discredited themselves by what the majority consider ‘uncivic’ behavior.

    https://www.quora.com/What-happened-to-Occupy-Wall-Street

  • BULL MARKET OVER? “You can blame Europe…you can blame the Fed…or you can blame h

    BULL MARKET OVER?

    “You can blame Europe…you can blame the Fed…or you can blame high energy prices. But no matter where you put the blame – it appears that our brief, nine-week bull market is over.” – William James, Eastman

    Source date (UTC): 2012-05-17 14:33:00 UTC

  • IS DONE – BUT SO IS THE AMERICAN EMPIRE “The focus on Greece is right. And all a

    http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/16/jogging-for-the-exit/GREECE IS DONE – BUT SO IS THE AMERICAN EMPIRE

    “The focus on Greece is right. And all allusions to these intertwined threads are worthwhile, as we wait for the American Empire to crumble under its rusty tanks.” – Sangita, Virginia.

    Source date (UTC): 2012-05-16 10:47:00 UTC