Greta

Open remark to Greta:

If you don't like the weather, just move.

-the Wizer.

You heard it here first

It was the incompetence of the Democrats that gave us 8 years of Bush 43.
It was the incompetence of the Republicans that gave us 8 years of Obama 44.
It is the incompetence of the Democrats that will give us 8 years of Trump 45.

Who is this working for (I mean for those of us outside the beltway)? Sure, Trump is shaking things up, but at the end of the day, he is doing it for Trump and the Trumpista cronies. If he helps the people along the way, that's mere collateral damage.

If it were just for that, I'd chalk it up to beltway business as usual. But Trump is a seriously bad choice at a worse time. He doesn't understand what made America great in the first place. He conflates the economy with stock market. He thinks China is the enemy instead of one of the countries that facilitates our lifestyle. He  won't move past Russia, resurrecting it every day in a stupid he-said she-said tweet. He wants to act like a fight promoter among Venezuelan dictators and Middle East mullahs. He goes out of his way to belittle people who are better than he is. He wants to slow immigrants, who are going to be the only economic cushion left after the baby boomers retire. The man is inexplicable, unless that explanation includes "madman". In the process, he moves us further away from freedom.

Lately we hear about socialism, like that is somehow Trump's new crusade. I have news. We're only going to get more socialism:

The entire public discussion revolves around what the politicians should “allow” or “forbid” the rest of us to do next, based on an unquestioning assumption of their moral authority to make such decisions for us.

I have just about given up on the process (18 months until the election). There are a handful of Democratic Party candidates that might be better at this than DJT, but their chances of getting good media coverage is nil. The Dems pick someone like Kammy Harris, who isn't up for this kind of fight. Or like Lizzie Warren, who is up for the fight, but doesn't have sharp enough arrows in her quiver.

To be honest, I was hoping for a Republican this time, but I see that isn't going to happen either. Therefore, I am officially calling it: Trump for another term.

Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. - H.L. Mencken

 

 

The cars that can't be built

They still make them, of course; although now they are called CUVs

Eric Peters assigns blame for the demise of the American sedan. He's right. You could get 9 (actually -- 10) people in a station wagon. I know this, because my 7 brothers and sisters and I fit along with Mom and Dad in a Kingswood Estate, at least for long enough to get to church and back.

So, what is a CUV except a bumped up sedan? Most of us boomers require more room than we had back then, but the idea was that a people mover could be fashioned from a sedan, which by the way already had enough trunk room for 6 suitcases.

That need hasn't totally gone away, but it is served by "light trucks" now, some believe to get around fuel economy rules.

Just as it was in those days, the people movers of today are fashioned from a car chassis. It's clearly a high roof version of the sedan. The fuel economy of the CUV is not materially different from the sedan version, either, so there isn't a big incentive to buy the low roof version. 

Soccer moms still need their mini-vans, but the car of the present is no longer a "car". It's a "light truck". Not much different from the station wagon, in concept or execution.

  

ironies

Proudly lifted from the Automatic Earth Blog

https://www.theautomaticearth.com/2018/05/a-guide-to-american-political-ironies/

Who wrote “We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal”? Jefferson, a slave owner.

Who was one of the most ardent Abolitionists? Alexander Hamilton.

Was he a slave owner? Yes.

Who won the election of 1824? No one, it was decided by the House of Representatives.

So which party lost? None: all four candidates were Democratic-Republicans.

In response, Andrew Jackson, a slave owner, created the Democratic Party.

Jackson created the Democratic Party as an anti-bank, anti-oligarch, states-rights platform the Tea Party would recognize.

Martin Van Buren, a Democrat, created the first concentration camp for Cherokee Indians in 1838.

Those 17,000 Cherokees owned 2,000 slaves.

Did Lincoln create the Republican Party? No, it was an amalgamation of failed parties: Lincoln was their 1st candidate.

What was the Lincoln campaign of 1860? Non-interference in state slavery.

Why? The decision of Dred Scott in 1857, a slave owned by abolitionists in a state he did not reside. Overturning 250 years of history, the case determined that no slave could ever become a citizen, i.e. freed.

Who was the best known Confederate General? Stonewall Jackson.

What did he do when he sided with the Southern cause? Freed his slaves.

Who else was a top Confederate General? William Mahone.

What did he do? He was the creator of the most successful interracial alliance in the post-war South. His name was purged first by Southern Democrats (for integration), then by modern Democrats (for being a Confederate).

Woodrow Wilson (D) ran an anti-collectivism, limited government, anti-monopoly, anti-bank campaign in 1912. He created the Federal Reserve and is known for founding the modern welfare state.

Wilson was re-elected on the slogan “He Kept Us Out of War.” He immediately forced the reluctant nation into WWI.

Herbert Hoover, as Secretary of Commerce under Calvin Coolidge during the Crash of ’21, demanded economic aid and bailouts, but Coolidge, “the great refrainer,” refused. The market immediately recovered.

Hoover was President during the Crash of ’29. He gave unprecedented bailouts to help the economy recover. It never did.

Roosevelt campaigned against Hoover for being “ the greatest spending Administration in peacetime in all our history.” He outspent Hoover tenfold.

Did Roosevelt’s “New Deal,” the greatest stimulus and spending program up to that time, end the Great Depression? No. It was going strong in 1939.

What did Roosevelt campaign on? He promised to keep us out of war in Europe.

Who was Time’s Man of the Year in 1938? Adolf Hitler.

Who was Man of the Year in 1939? Joseph Stalin.

1942? Joseph Stalin.

Wars under “anti-war” Democratic Party: 93 years, 46.5%. 625K deaths since 1864.

Wars under “pro-war” “Republican” Party: 107 Years 53.5%. 12K deaths since 1864.

Who voted for the 1964 Civil Rights Act? Republicans 80% vs. Democrats 69%.

Who filibustered it? Southern Democrat Strom Thurmond.

Who signed it? Lyndon Johnson, a southern Democrat.

Where did Thurmond go? The GOP, who had voted against him and against southern segregation.

What did Richard Nixon campaign on? “Law and Order” and a “secret plan” to exit Vietnam. He immediately bombed Cambodia and was later impeached for a burglary.

Who said “the soundest way to raise revenues in the long run is to cut rates now” and “Every dollar released from taxation that is spent or invested will help create a new job and a new salary” ? John F. Kennedy.

Who gave the greatest modern tax cut? John F. Kennedy (income and capital gains, signed by Johnson).

Who most increased the postwar Federal deficit? Ronald Reagan 186%.

Who most increased taxes? Ronald Reagan, 1982 (as % of GDP, excluding Obamacare and Johnson’s one-year tax).

Who called young blacks “Superpredators”? Hillary Clinton, 1996.

Who put the most black men in jail? Bill Clinton, under the 1994 Violent Crime Control Act.

Who cut welfare most? Bill Clinton, 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Act.

Who was called the first “Black President”? Bill Clinton (“white skin notwithstanding, this is our first black President. Blacker than any actual black person who could ever be elected in our children’s lifetime.” –Toni Morrison, 1998. I swear this is true).

What was George W. Bush’s platform? Smaller, less-invasive government, lower taxes, and no foreign wars.

Who are the Neoconservatives? “Liberal hawks who became disenchanted with the pacifist foreign policy of the Democratic Party”.

Where did these Liberal Democrats finally prosper? Under G.W. Bush and on Fox News, e.g. Bill Kristol.

Which President won the Nobel Peace Prize? Barack Obama. (As did Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson and Jimmy Carter)

What was his legacy? War every day of all eight years, with +50,000 official strikes in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, Iraq, and Syria and unofficial attacks in Ukraine, Sudan, Niger, Cameroon, Uganda, and elsewhere, as well as 3,000 drone deaths.

Wow, anything else? Due to his intervention, Obama, the first black president, caused the creation of an open-air black slave market in Libya.

Who campaigned advocating a Syrian no-fly zone expected to cause WWIII with Russia? Hillary Clinton (D).

Who campaigned for peace talks and de-escalation with Russia? Donald Trump (R).

Who sent 164 missiles into Russian ally Syria? Donald Trump (R).

Who advocated against the recent attacks? “Far-right” speakers Rand Paul and Tucker Carlson of Fox News.

Who advocated for the attacks? “Left” speakers Fareed Zakaria, and Rachel Maddow with left media Slate and Mother Jones.

What was the actual breakdown? 22% of GOP supported Syrian airstrikes in 2013 vs 86% for the same strikes in 2017.

And on and on. Got it? Know which side you’re on? History, party platforms, personal beliefs, economy, all clear?

Another Narrative, Dashed to Bits

So, this is a story, a black woman surprised to realize that a man wearing a confederate flag shirt is somehow not a racist.

It's ultimately tragic that it has come to this, that many people think the flag of the Confederacy is somehow conflated with racism. The truth is, the cause of the Confederacy was just, even if the motivation of all its participants was not.

In order to learn all of the lessons of the Civil War, it is important to separate the issues and analyze them independently and thoroughly. There were people on both sides of the slavery issue that wanted secession. Just as there were many racists fighting for the union.

Hopefully people will start to get it.

The Neo-Luddites among us

Andrew Moran recently published a good summary of the benefits of automation for the workforce of the past, present, and future. I think most people know these facts intuitively, but there is always a lot of noise and distraction coming from special interest groups who hope you won't notice recognize the truths of economic reality.

The US government has us ever leaning towards socialism with whatever bits and pieces of disconnected truthiness they can gather into a narrative basket. For example, they state how hard it is for a family to live on less than $15/hour, without disclosing that it is precisely their actions that make this impossible in the first place. Years of dollar devaluation have led to dollars being worth pennies. This is the problem that they say they are trying to fix by reducing the value of the dollars you already make even further.

Automation has always been a way to increase productivity, and is naturally a deflationary phenomenon. If you can make 11 widgets for a dollar, when you could only make ten before, you've just increased the value of your dollar. This is the unyielding promise of automation.

Our government and their cronies deploy policies that counteract this natural process. I was stunned when a few years back, the Federal Reserve (a government sponsored enterprise) stated outright that they want to eliminate 2% of each of your dollars' value, on average, every year. This is what they mean when they say they want to target 2% inflation. They are now achieving exactly that with the latest results on inflation. In doing so they limit the ability of people to provide for their families at a lower wage rate.

The surprising thing is this is an overt collusion between government and the banks to induce an extra 2% (or more) tax on everything you buy. Automation, which until now was the one thing you could rely on as a way to improve your life, may not be enough. And that's growing insurance that  the Luddites will soonget another shot at manipulating their victims.

Listing Agent

This morning while I was extracting some bits from the interweb, I came upon a click-bait site, sponsored by KBB  , No, don't click it. It's an inconsequential site that forces you to look through 11 pages to get to the end and find out which is the "best" luxury car under $35,000. You see a lot of sites like this, from "The ten things you should never tell your wife" Or "You won't believe these compromised celebrity pix, especially # 345".

I get it. Really I do.Content writers get paid by the click, so sites will try to raise up their click counts in order to make their money. Usually it takes one or two clicks before you know you've been had.

I wanted to believe. I wanted to believe that Kelley Blue Book, a respected reference resource at one time, would take the high road and give you a straight up article delineating 10 cars worthy of your consideration. But no, this was a waste of time. I figure others, like me would be eager to see if the list held any secrets to reveal from the automotive market. We're all within a few short years of needing another car, and this kind of information might be good for future reference.

Unfortunately, KBB wants you to labor through all eleven slow loading and advertising infested pages. I was one of the unfortunate many who waded through every slide. However, when I saw it was a click bait trap, I decided to make the best of it. I pirated the list.

So, as a public service, I present to you, totally click and ad free, Kelley Blue Books' idea of the 10 best luxury cars under $35,000. Remember, power windows may not be included. Notice that almost half of the vehicles aren't even actually cars, so it's not an honest list. It is however, free; and hey, it's not even my list, so cut me a break.

Without further ado, I present KBBs 10 best luxury cars under $35,000.

10. 2018 Acura TLX
9. 2018 Buick Regal Sportback
8. 2018 Audi Q3
7. 2018 Mercedes CLA
6. 2018 Acura RDX
5. 2018 Mercedes GLA
4. 2018 Cadillac ATS
3. 2018 Audi A3
2. 2018 Lexus NX
1. 2018 Infiniti Q50

Aren't you glad you saved the 11 clicks and minutes of suspense?

Getting Education

Teachers are running protests in Arizona and Colorado, following similar activities in Oklahoma and Kentucky. I think it's time we faced the obvious truth: This isn't working for anybody is it? The kids aren't really getting an education. The teachers aren't really doing what they are there to do.

It's time to send the kids home. Send them home, and have their parents deal with them. Let real solutions emerge from the predicament.

The parents who treat schools as glorified day care, can find better day care, closer to home, and more personalized, at that. The ones who really did want their kids to get an education, well, there's plenty of unemployed teachers, now. Some of them might be good enough to teach, and now only have to deal with students who are properly engaged in the task.

It's time to re-roll education and how it is done.

Exodus

They say The Donald can't take a joke, since he skipped out of the White House Correspondent's Dinner, a charity event. Well, apparently, there weren't any jokes; just some tired lefty whining points. Everybody has lost their flipping sense of humor.

They've also lost their grip on reality. Honestly, I can't see how anyone could conclude that voting for a democrat is an improvement. I think political discourse has devolved to the point where we just need to all go our separate ways. Another point for broad secession.

I see where a Grand Exodus from the Blue States will commence as a result of the crazy new tax laws. Nothing against people leaving California, Illinois, and New York for Nevada, Texas, and Florida. It will spark some long needed changes to tax policies in those states. One thing to keep in mind, though: It would have only taken 800 more progressives moving to Florida to put an Al Gore into the oval office. If we think things are bad now, what happens when Florida, Nevada, and New Mexico turn back to the dark side.

Candace for President

If this is "Far right", then bring on much more of it.

Jim Kunstler has a good take the "Victim Cartel" machine called the Democratic Party, and where they may be headed now.

Weekend Update

It's been a while. So how is everybody? I've been remiss in my duties of keeping my loyal readers informed on socio-economics, politics, and other lurking dangers. So, I thought maybe I'd cover ten topics briefly, which should tide us over until the new year, or perhaps even until the next crisis.

1. Net neutrality 

I don't even know why I lead with this one, it's such a non-event. Maybe to get me warmed up. Net Neutrality was cooked up by prior-administration n'er-do-wells, as a way to put government bureaucrats squarely in the middle of all internet transactions. It's a recipe for government control of the means of communication. It had nothing to do with neutrality. Neutrality is just a nice word they tacked on to make people think it was worth doing.

Like most of the Obama Administration Overreach, it was mowed down by a refreshing regulatory rollback courtesy of Donald J. Trump. Things like this make me optimistic.

2.  Bitcoin

So, what is it worth?

I see it as largely a play on transactional efficiency. Right now, Visa and Mastercard get what, 3%? If bitcoin owners can loan out their bitcoins to facilitate the cost of transactions, they can make a return on their investment. That is, if they can figure out how to monetize their asset. Let's say that they do find a way to monetize by charging transaction fees of 1%.

I've noted that there's about $2B/ day in bitcoin transactions. Maybe that goes up. Probably does. But at the current rate, a 1% monetization yields about 2-1/2% per year on all the outstanding bitcoins.. Not bad, but not killing it.

They have to figure out some way to monetize it, and I don't see how it does better than Visa/Mastercard in the near term. So, is it worth $20K/coin? 

Maybe, if you like <5 1="" and="" can="" doesn="" down.="" figure="" font="" government="" how="" if="" it="" joe="" nbsp="" out="" per="" price.="" rent="" returns.="" shut="" sixpackcoin="" t="" the="" they="" to="" transaction.="" undercut="" yield="">

Yeah, I don't see $20K of value there, even if you ignore the risks.

3.  Harassment 

Blowback is a bitch. The people who point the fingers call the kettles black, etc. Had to laugh at Al Franken (for the first time in 20 years). He's been a sexist clown for hire through both of his careers, and it was time for him to go. Conyers should have been out in 1994, but, well, Detroit. 

Roy Moore wasn't my idea of a senator, but Doug Jones isn't exactly Everett Dirksen, either. Anybody care to tally whether more democrats than republicans are involved? That's one difference between the two parties, anyway.

4.  North Korea

See The Mouse That Roared

5. The GOP Tax Bill

Really, really bad tax policy for the economy. Adds 1.5 T to the already suffocating national debt. Steals another obscene sum of money from future generations. A blown opportunity to end tax subsidies for inflated real estate markets. Subsidizes high tax states. 

Overestimates economic growth (which can't be much greater than productivity growth (%) plus population growth (2%)). There is no 5% in the next year, much less the next ten years in a row.

6. The Fed

The Federal Reserve is an institution owned and run by the banks. It is run for the banks and for the people who profit the banks. It should be dissolved. If the doors were closed tomorrow, things would rapidly improve.

7.  Kneeling Football Players

Nobody cares. About them, their cause, or any other aspect of their individual lives. Real football fans aren't watching the sidelines. But there are fewer real football fans than ever before. That's the real problem.

America First

"If he was thinking he could scare us with the sound of a dog barking, that's really a dog dream" North Korean Foreign Minister Ri Yong-ho told reporters in New York adding that Trump’s warnings are just a nonsensical “dog dream."

You know I've been openly critical of Trump and his policies here. My fondest hope has been that he accidentally gets some things right.

I do acknowledge that when one of his policies both aligns with reality, and it moves us towards a better world, we should applaud it. He probably doesn't understand why it works, though .

America First seems to be one of those policies. I believe that a good government is a selfish one. I've never liked the idea of "president as leader of the free world". Screw that. We have enough trouble managing our own affairs. I totally endorse the idea that we shouldn't have to carry any water for Japan, Saudi Arabia, or East Timor. Trump's job is to preserve the interests of the USA. Period. The more these other countries do for themselves, the better for everyone. America First, if it really is policy, is good policy, because it puts our resources where they belong: in the defense of our best interest. Nothing more, nothing less.

What leads me to believe that the Donald does not really believe it himself, though, is this insane sabre rattling he is engaged in with  "Little Rocket Man". If he believes in America First, what good does it do to take pot shots at Pyongyang? That is, unless he happens to think that the interests of the USA are met by using up expensive ordinance, to the benefit of the military industrial complex.

America is not served when we spend blood and treasure for another country. We might loudly proclaim that it's better to fight in the Iraqi desert than in our own backyards. But it's impossible to justify fighting over a piece of Iraqi desert, if you stop to think about it.

Similarly, America First is not being served when we conduct trade wars. Sanctions, embargoes, tariffs, and restrictions hurt all of us, and our trading partners. Our only weapon is the dollar's status as the world's reserve currency, and the only two outcomes are higher prices and accelerating de-dollarization. The end result is less strength for America. We should be kicking down barriers to trade, not putting up new ones.

Finally, America is not served by building arbitrary walls either. Attracting new blood is our best hope of working through a demographic malaise the likes of which has already afflicted Japan and will slowly strangle us. No, we don't have to invite over thousands of new dependents, but we do have to put some real taxpayers back into the system, if for no other reason than to start covering LBJ's bad bets.

So, the Donald is still light years away from restoring a decent economy. What he proposes will have an opposite effect of what he promises. In that sense his results will be like that of most politicians. "If you like your doctor", for example, or "peace in our time". America First should be America First, and that means we should stop fighting other countries' wars, and figure out how to improve their lives (and ours); through free trade, and sensible immigration. 

What Actually Happened?

I'd like someone to write a book about how we all were once able to ignore misguided, petulant, dishonest, obnoxious, and noisy people; and now all of a sudden we have to pick one of them to be president? What happened, indeed?

Ask the Wizer, Summer edition

So a good friend asked why I had not been updating this blog recently. I replied that I had already closed the book on the Donald, that the national debt was still 20T and the stock market was in a bubble. What more was there to say?

His response: "What Bubble?". I now see that my work here is not yet done.

I recently spent some coin, sweat, and tears learning all about finance, including the workings of capital markets, and have formed some persistent opinions about asset values. Basically, this is an area I feel at least nominally qualified to comment on. I will spare the usual policy indictments and accusations of malfeasance at the Fed and at the treasury; to arrive at a reasonable estimate of what the market is worth, just as sort of a reality check.

First, most of the known methods of calculating the objective worth of the market try to determine the relationship between Asset prices and Gross Domestic Product. Below is one such chart. Yes, it is possible to "game" a chart like this, but I wanted to get it out there just to get your attention. When the market is high relative to GDP, then it becomes harder to see where the growth is going to come from.






This next chart shows the relationship between Fed money printing and the stock market. The recent news is that the Fed is going to start retiring the bonds created with this money, so the balance sheet reduction will likely have a negative effect on the stock market.



For exhibit "C", I'd like to point out the CAPE market indicator, which prices a stock based on ten years worth of earnings, Has now blown past 30. This means, among other things, that it will take over 30 years to return your money and that likely earnings going forward are at best in the 2 to 2-1/4% range. That is, unless you see the market decline to more normal ratios. Then you might see some growth....after losing 40% of your principal.

The thesis for continued upward trajectory of the S&P from here is that historic growth and productivity improvements will continue into the future. The trends that make that a troublesome expectation are:

1.  Higher interest rates, stemming from the return of bonds to the market.
2.  Higher interest rates, stemming from the FOMC target rate increases.
3.  Reduction in spending by the unemployed, the retired, and the dislocated.
4.  Earnings shortfalls in a growing number of industries.
5. Government spending shortfalls due to rising interest on the 20 Trillion debt.

In addition, the speculative jump in stock prices will reverse when it becomes apparent that the Trump repatriation of overseas funds, the tax reform, and the Obamacare spending reductions are not going to happen.

Want some more charts?

Here's one of my favorites. While there might be 2% to be had in the market today, there might not be 2% available over the next 12 years. Unless you're talking about -2%



Finally, every good bubble needs a pin to pop it. I nominate thois one:

For more info on that, look up the subprime auto loan market.

A great many indicators are flashing red today, and this is the high priced market even Warren Buffet wouldn't want to buy into. The risk of a serious drop in the S&P should be viewed as extremely likely.

I call that a bubble.

The Trump Era, already bookended

I'm no fan of The Donald. I'm often accused of that crime, because I freely show that I'm also no fan of the rest of the plunder class, either, which includes all but a handful of congress.

In February 2016 , well before the primaries ramped up, I posted this:

It's not supposed to be this important a job anyway. I bet if Trump would simply read the job description, he would immediately withdraw.

So now comes news that he finds the job "hard" The job is hard, but they make it harder by trying to "run things" Of course it's hard, Donald. You are making it hard. Stop it!

The federal government in this country has a very simple job. Oversee essential services, protect our borders, negotiate foreign treaties, and ....that's it. Everything else is supposed to run itself. Easy, right? The gig is limited in scope, and yes, he should be able to do it and his regular job at the same time.

Instead, Trump thinks he's in charge of health care all of a sudden. How did he make that leap of logic? The dope who held the office before him let them put his name on it. Not his only mistake, but a big one. Trump should not claim ownership of every piece of garbage bill this congress spits out; it's only going to define him badly. But maybe it's too late to change anything. Seriously. 100 and what, 10 days in, I can put a wrapper on this presidency:

In March 2016, I summarized the Trump proposition this way.

From appearances, here is a guy who transcends ideology, will address the festering issues of the economy, play tough guy with our enemies, and finally shake up the status quo in Washington. 

Instead, what we will get is a guy who has no ideology because he has no principles, has not a single idea of what it takes to fix an economy, totally misunderstands the aims of a foreign policy, and is one of the main contributors to the problem of cronyist Washington.

I had it written over a year ago, when no one else was bothering to predict the results of a Trump presidency. The transformation is complete. Brandon Smith gives a few more insights into the flippage. All I know is it was clear to those of us paying attention. Of course, if the electorate had been paying attention, we would have been out of this mess a hundred years ago. It makes the previous 100 days seem inconsequential.

Anyway, as I did with Obama's presidency, I'm calling it early. There's nothing more to say about the Trump administration (and while I'm calling things, I am predicting that he will not run for a second term. Then we can get on with the peoples' business of making America "Great" again.

Wizer Words #2

The federal government should not be in the art business. For the same reason that it should not be in the religion business.

Wizer words

Another thing that bugs me. Trump may have made a mistake by allowing Ryancare to proceed, but it ultimately didn't happen, so he should be given credit instead of blame.

Also, all that happened for Obama's first 100 days with a 787 B spending bill, that Barry couldn't find enough shovels to implement.

I'll take where we are now.

Transparency, at long last.

This is the last post for 2016, and the first since the election, so I need to do a little housekeeping here.

First, I just need to log my advice for the Democratic National Committee. It is simply this: If you do not want a Donald Trump to get elected, do not bring us a Hillary Clinton.

I really don't know what to expect with Trump. He did not show any trump cards in the run up to the election, which was probably smart, given who he was running against. I think he could accidentally be a decent president. Not a top ten president, mind you, but he could do some good. Plus, he doesn't have to be all that great to make the top 25. Really, the less he does, the better his chances. My pipe dream is he cancels all the executive orders from the last 250 years, and appoints a couple of smart people to the supreme court. Then he can retire and play all the golf he wants, as far as I'm concerned. Of course, if he would be so kind as to eliminate the DEA, the DoEd, the DoEn, DHS, and a half a dozen other D's I'd be all right with that, too. Then play golf. Oh, and put an eviction notice on the UN, and secede from NATO, and ..., well, maybe he would need a second term to get all that done. No reason to get ahead of ourselves.

What worries me is Trump will instead double down on the executive branch abuses of picking winners and losers. If he does, it will continue to distort the economy and create other imbalances to be dealt with only down the road. He could make trade killing tariff deals and make things worse for everybody -- except the special interests. Frankly, I don't lose any sleep over it, but the economy is the most important basis for freedom and liberty, and it's so damn easy to get it wrong. I finally, resignedly, hope he doesn't do any more damage than the average president.

Anyway,  he wasn't my candidate but I do wish him well.

What else is on my "to do" list? Ah, yes, the fake news phenomenon. Sure, I've seen some fake news. It's impact is negligible. It's fakeness is obvious and inconsequential. What's interesting is to see all the mainstream media outlets now try to co-opt the term fake news to mean everything they don't want you to see. It's pathetic, reeks of desperation, and can only mean it's the end of the road for most of them.

Hacking elections. Obama said his would be the most transparent administration in history. It was true in the sense that it was pretty obvious what he was up to all along, even if his administration did its best to obfuscate everything. Finally, when a bucket of truth is poured onto the last embers of his term, there is very little left to learn. That the bucket of truth comes courtesy of Wikileaks instead of the White House should not change the value of the truth.

The administration whose state department had their server in the bathroom closet should not be the ones who get to comment on cyber security. That's like putting Dodd and Frank in charge of bank reform.

Of the 10 or 20 million people who were previously clueless about Hillary's servers and the inner DNC workings, it's possible that several million voters went a different way. It might have even been enough to swing the election. I don't mind it much when truth sways an election. It renews my faith in republican democracy.

So, if it was the Russians that did it (and I'm not buying it just yet), then maybe they did us a favor. "Right neighborly of them", I might even say. At the end of the day, perhaps the people were not fooled. Long live transparency.

Alleppo now on the map.

A couple of random thoughts while watching the networks try to jar Johnson votes loose for Hillary:

The right answer for Johnson was, of course, one of the following:

1. We should be entirely disinterested in Aleppo, but for some &^%($ reason, we are not.
2. We should be far less concerned about children of Aleppo than we are about the children of Chicago.
3. Which middle east dictator should we prop up this week?
4. What is it about Aleppo that isn't going on in dozens of other cities in the region.
5. First, I think we should stop bombing them.
6. Aleppo Schmalleppo. 

Look, I get it that Gary is not focused on everything that matters; but this is a job interview, and if one of the interview questions is what's going on in one town on the other side of the planet, I'm going to at least let him pull out an atlas and give a thoughtful response.

But that's not what's going on here. What's going on is an organized attempt at painting an unflattering picture of a candidate. 

Even if someone is overly sympathetic to the plight of the Syrians, how can your opinion of either Clinton or Trump improve based on this one dull response?

Ticket Stub

“The real division is not between conservatives and revolutionaries but between authoritarians and libertarians.”  ― George Orwell, The Lost Orwell: Being a Supplement to The Complete Works of George Orwell

I noticed the other day that my membership in the Libertarian Party has now reached 20 years. I hadn't thought about party membership as signifying much of anything, other than supporting the good guys. After all, the LP is the only political party that's come close to decoding the formula for governing humans. I usually don't worry about whether or not they had a good showing in the election, since the result would always be symbolic, anyway.

Oh, sure, I voted for Gary Johnson instead of Mitt Romney in 2012. Who wouldn't have? In fact, judging from this article, Mitt himself must think that that was a pretty good idea.

Third parties don't usually last this long (the LP has been around over 40 years), The Reform Party has logged 21 years as of this writing. However, the Bull Moose Party has not fielded a candidate in 99 years (apparently there are plenty of other outlets for progressives now). For some reason, we pick from Republicans and Democrats these days.

In 2016, now, the Republicans have nominated their populist, and the Democrats have nominated their authoritarian. It appears that there would have been a real opportunity for a liberty candidate. In response to this golden opportunity, the 2016 Libertarian Party nominated, wait for it..., a couple of Republicans to lead their ticket.

Third parties often attract strange actors who simply want the ballot access. Ralph Nader, and Pat Buchanan before him, took the Reform Party after Perot. History is replete with such interlopers. This year is no different. And if Gary Johnson gets the 15% vote that he alone would call a moral victory, there will be many more pretenders looking to carry the LP battle flag in future years. Ballot access creates strange bedfellows.

So, just as Trump has hijacked the GOP, and a Clinton bullies her way to the Dem nomination, we see that qualifications are optional for the LP as well. For today, we can barely discern that Johnson (leaving out Weld for the moment) is the most qualified candidate still standing. So, even the Libertarian Party - the party of principle - can be hijacked. Can't tell the players without a scorecard.

The debate rages whether Johnson/Weld will siphon votes from Trump or from Clinton. We should be well past the siphon phase, by now. We should be choosing the best candidate that shows enough savvy to actually get on the ballot. Yes, the choices are pretty thin at this point. I suppose if you want a Republican in the office, well, Johnson is now your best bet. However, the polls are showing that Johnson/Weld are actually pulling more from the Never-Hillary Crowd. Maybe the Weld VP nomination makes that happen.

If the GOP would have nominated a Republican, they'd probably win in a landslide. Incredibly, the only Republican still in the race is the Libertarian Party nominee. And while we're saying it, perhaps the only qualified Democrat in the race is the Libertarian Party candidate for VP.