Skip to main content

Bush - he's no conservative

In the ultimate final repudiation of the conservative movement, President Bush is leaving a $473 billion deficit - except that it is really at least $553 billion, since the Iraq and Afghanstan wars will cost at least $80 billion and, in the zany world of government accounting, those are not included.
Shortly after his first election, an editorial article in the Wall St. Journal called him a "big government conservative". I wish I could remember who wrote the piece. It stands out in my memory because there really isn't such a thing. Going back to the founding fathers, conservative thought has centered on small government; indeed, there were serious debates about maintaining a standing army because the risk to a republic was too high.
When President Lyndon Johnson supported the war in Viet Nam and the Great Society social programs, we called it guns and butter, and argued vehemently against it. Now that a so-called conservative has supported the exact same policy, our voices were muted.
Many conservatives will recoil at the thought, but we should have raised taxes to pay for the war. If we are going to ask young men and women to die for us, we can stand up for the money.
The Republicans must wander in the wilderness for a few more years while they regain some orthodoxy instead of being some kind of ersatz sad imitation of the Democrats.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Stimulus Plan

Mr. President: The House stimulus bill is awful. Dangerous. Counter-productive. It has a very high probability of making things worse!. Your man Rahm Emanuel is supposed to be a tough guy: turn him loose on the House Dems - they are selling you down the river. Some simple tests: the spending will improve long-term productivity; the spending will reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and the spending will happen fast; very, very fast. There may need to be some legislation to enable spending without years of environmental review. For example, spending on wind farms would improve long-run productivity and reduce dependence on foreign oil. But let's say the wind farm is a couple of miles offshore. You can't have environmental groups stopping the development to see if some fish will be harmed. This spending has to happen now. And, no tax cuts with the possible exception of AMT. People aren't going to spend any tax savings; they are going to pay their credit card bills or r...

No Steve No

To:Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer: Please, please don't spend my money on Yahoo. Spend $4 billion per year for the next 10 years building something new and better. This has to now be an ego deal, not an economic deal. If you withdraw the bid, YHOO is a $15 stock. You are too smart for this. Many times the best deals are the ones you don't make. This is one of those times. Don't spend my money on this. Sincerely, gene

So Who Wins?

Every recession plants the seeds for economic advantage in the future recovery. In the very tough 1973-1974 recession, prices fell so low that it enabled the creation of the leveraged buyout industry. With many manufacturing companies in particular trading at 3-4 times cash flow, new market entrants like KKR, Forstmann Little and Dyson Kisner Moran came in and created gigantic wealth for themselves and early investors. In the 1991-1992 downturn, engendered in part by the massive office space overbuilding funded by Savings and Loans (Resolution Trust Co, anyone?) made it possible for telcom and internet start-ups in Austin, San Jose, Northern VA, Boston's Route 128, Dallas, etc. to rent offices at a fraction of the cost had those communities not been overbuilt. And the 2001-02 downturn gave us cheap fiber and bandwidth, and bargain-priced software to feed productivity gains in corporations everywhere. So, where is the upside? At this moment, all that I can project with some confid...