Open thread May 14, 2011 Dan Crawford | May 14, 2011 6:57 am Tags: open thread Comments (41) | Digg Facebook Twitter |
Too often this is obvious in AB comments: “Left’s Ideology Is Untethered From The Facts”
Just some examples from here: http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/571897/201105111830/Lefts-Ideology-Is-Untethered-From-The-Facts.htm
Good morning, y’all! Here’s a video of a hawk flying through a hole in a wall to illustrate how agile they are. I’m posting this in the the spririt of Saturday Open Thread. It’s ummm… like….OPEN! NancyO
G’mornin to Ya, young lady!
Off line, some of us have been discussing the value/benefits/future for Quality Easing (QE). It is my belief that it is failing as a long term economic impact, and that there will be a third.
Wiki says this: “Werner’s comments in this CNBC programme it is apparent that the reason why he employed the expression was because he argued that the policy that was being called ‘quantitative easing’ by central banks and in the media – base money expansion and open market purchases of securities from banks – was not ‘true’ quantitative easing as originally defined by him, and hence likely to remain insufficient to deliver sustainable, productive and hence non-inflationary growth. Instead, he argued, ‘true quantitative easing’ was needed, namely an expansion in productive credit creation. This required a second attempt by central banks, “a kind of QE2”.Meanwhile, the expression is today mainly used to refer to a second round of what Prof. Werner would consider the ‘wrong type’ of QE.”
A definition of QE on Wiki can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantitative_easing
Nice to have the blogosphere back in business.
Dartmouth College and baseball, otherwise George Will?
“Data” seems to have a liberal bias.
Yes, it is stuck in a liquidity trap. Krugman has been saying this for two years.
Note you and Krugman on the same tare.
It is not just me:
Gordon Adams’s blog
HASC In A Parallel Budgetary Universe
“11 May 2011
Posted by Gordon Adams
The House Armed Services Committee is marking up its defense bill for FY 2012. There are lots of interesting provisions, like an open grant to the executive branch to engage in almost any kind of war it wants, anywhere, against anything it might consider a terrorist. But from a budget perspective, the committee is clearly living in a parallel, and very unreal, universe.
The committee seems to think that the starting point for talking about defense spending is the $553 billion number the administration originally sent up in February. But we entered a new world with the congressional decision to provide $529 billion to the Pentagon in the base budget for FY 2011.
Were Congress to actually provide $553 billion for FY 2012, that would be growth of 4.5% in the defense budget, or roughly 3.0% real growth. But the FY 2011 level they appropriated sent a clear message from the Congress: defense must participate in the overall effort to control federal spending.
And, without making it explicit, the White House agrees. The President made it clear two weeks ago that his own defense budget plans had to come down $400 billion from what he thought they would be. And he said, that would happen over 12 years, with FY 2023 as the end point. The math shows that this means he thinks those cuts should start with the FY 2012 budget, not FY 2013. And though he did not send up a budget amendment, that means the cutting starts with the FY 2011 baseline.
So Congress and the President seem to agree that $529 billion is the starting point for defense in FY 2012. Looks like the budget committee in the Senate, maybe the Gang of Six, and the appropriators are going to have to deal with the HASC’s “willing suspension of disbelief.” A lot of what is getting authorized today is going to get a relook when the realists take over the budget process.”
The directive section of the mark tells the pentagon to ignore the impact planning for endless wars will have on the budget, the mark directs the writers of the Quadrennial Defense Review […]
For those of you who missed it, this is the end of national nursing home week.
Those who are residents appreciate visits; talk a while, play some checkers or cards, watch a baseball game with the folks in the lounge.
And the staff members always like a compliment, although they are likely to be too busy to loinger and chat.
ilsm–Speaking of audits, the Social Security Trustees issue a financial report every year. One just came out. Good news for ordinary people–SS ain’t broke. Bad news for the Bond Vigilantes–it ain’t broke.
Your post reminds me that the Social Security Administration submits an annual financial report every year and guess what?! And, wouldn’t you know, every year the books balance. Really, truly, honest to God, every nickle of operational and program expenditures are accounted for. Don’t know why DOD can’t do that. What do you say, ilsm? Why is it so hard for DOD? Something to do with the most expensive things for the least likely contingencies? 😉 NancyO
The HBO movie “Too Big To Fail” has its first run on May 23rd. Buss is good so far.
Mawnin’ Mr. CoRev–Here’s something for you to start out the day. From the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Universe. I’m taking in the 9:00 show at the Restaurant at the End of the Universe–this is a clip of the floor show. See you there! NancyO
Thanks for your posts, STR. I’m learning a lot. I may not like what I hear, it’s important to know how it looks from your end. NancyO
Title X. Keeping the services totally separate creates different accounting systems and approaches. Tough to match, sum and compare the services under one Dept, DoD. Billions have been spent trying.
Consider the alternative to title X, Caesar and his armies march into Ro.. err, DC.
I was researching a topic I am working and came across a military service regulation concerning “internal controls”.
Seems there are regulations which they do not follow.
There has been a requirement for federal agencies to have balanced books since a law in 1982. See Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA).
Unfortunately DoD do not have any internal controls. How they get $700,000 million bucks a year with no controls is a wonderment. Most of it borrowed from the grandkids!
Liquidity trap from Wiki: “The liquidity trap, in Keynesian economics, is a situation where monetary policy is unable to stimulate an economy, either through lowering interest rates or increasing the money supply. Liquidity traps typically occur when expectations of adverse events (e.g., deflation, insufficient aggregate demand, or civil or international war) make persons with liquid assets unwilling to invest.”
From CoRev a liquidity trap can be exacerbated and/or created due to policies that attack and regulates those organizations and individuals with liquid assets to invest. How many times do we need to hear tax the “RICH” regulate the investment bankers, their sources of revenue, WALL STREET, and the small banks which actually make most of the loans for businesses to grow.
BTW, I am hearing anecdotes that some small Home Improvement businesses are seeing significant improvement so far this year. That appears to be untrue for the Home Building industry.
CoRev–Keeping the services separate has nothing to do with not keeping good books. You tell each branch to give you the attached spreadsheet. You tell them they won’t get their SES bonuses this year if they don’t, and may not anyhow. And, you direct them to give you an action plan to address any imbalance conditions you discover. You say you will personally review all recommendations for awards in their commands before they will be permitted to release any performance or other bonus payments.
To conclude your ACTION See Below Memo, you direct all recipients of the memo to be prepared to discuss their audits at a preliminary performance discussion in X weeks. The higher up they are, the sooner they will have their cheerful little meetings with the boss. Really good, terrifying bosses always find out when the guy has scheduled his annual leave and schedule the perf. review IN THE MIDDLE OF THE FIRST WEEK. Timing is everything. Thursdays and Fridays are best.
See, piece of cake. You mean, you never did anything like this? Hmm. Maybe that’s why DOD couldn’t balance a cup in a saucer. 😀 NancyO
Title X is a set of optional statutes never applied, but used to squander trillions.
See my post, and wonder how each service and DoD staff agencies like missile defense are getting around generally accepted accounting process (GAAP) the federal version, standards and OMB direction.
The legislative section of the US constitution says it is congress’ fault!
The congress is in on the fraud, they prefer to just keep spending the money for fraudulent “requirements”, approached in the most expensive manner, and not getting any products.
The acquisition guys have been talking and not doing military equipment valuation for years. But how do you value something that is bought to satisfy fictions, has not been engineered and never passed a test?
ilsm tagline: Plan for the most “unlikely contingnecies, buy the most exepnsive stuff.
Nancy O, Thank you for the clips this fine Saturday morning. Makes this old mans heart happy.
NanO, you are trying to compare SSA with a Service, when that Service much larger than SSA. A better real world comparison would be a comparison of SSA identifying and cleaning up all the SS payment problems compared to a Service contractor payment problems. Oh, you are not entitled to see all those classified payments.
On the major operating budget categories there is little error/lost data. My point is that the types and magnitudes of the problems of SSA payments/DOD payments are similar.
As for your top down demand example, the devil is in the details of the spreadsheet categories. Basically, one spreadsheet will not suffice to collect the details where the problems lie.
ILSM said: “Title X is a set of optional statutes never applied,…”. Let me refer back to my opening comment: “Too often this is obvious in AB comments: “Left’s Ideology Is Untethered From The Facts” .
You’re welcome. If we ever meet in the physicial world I am buying. Coffee.
Norman, this old man reacted to this headline today: Bin Laden In Pakistan: Potent But Past His Prime, ‘Pecked Endlessly At A Computer’
No problemo, Norman. I clearly waste way too much time digging up obscure Nature Facts. When I look at that Goshawk fly sideways, for Pete’s sake, I think about how birds are little dinosaurs. Sauropods are the closest, I think. Buff is a good at flying planes, but this bird beats all! TTFN. NancyO
Spreadsheets don’t come out of the air. You have to refine them to get at the information you want. So, if the first one doesn’t work, you devise a new one and keep on doing that. Remember W. Edwards Deming? Continuous quality improvement? It sure worked for the Japanese after WE invented it. It is unacceptable for the DOD to exempt itself from the ordinary management accountability, war or no war. This is not something to dismiss with a casual “Oh, well, they would if they could but “it’s just too hard.” Bull. NancyO
“Optional statute?” What in blazes is that?? Man, DOD’s got it made. No wonder they hand out SES awards like favors at a kid’s birthday party. NancyO
Oooooooh, that was cold, JUST COLD, PJ! NancyO
You’re being a little hyperbolic here, NanO. Why does SSA consistently fail to catch all the mispayments? Clearly a spreadsheet could solve each and every case, and the memo and Thursday/Friday review incentive all the outside SSA miscreants to stop accepting said payments. 😉
BTW, I did not say just too hard, but it is a much more complex problem exacerbated by conflicting law(s), and politics, unlike the SSA example I used.
You seem to put out a null hypotheses: that “Left’s Ideology (your caps) Is Untethered From The Facts”
They is fairly straight forward to reject.
Check these “facts”:
Assessment of Selected Weapon Systems, http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11233sp.pdf
High Risk (fraud waste and abuse) Programs, http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11394t.pdf
DoD management requires highly refined and very rare skills, knowledge and aptitudes to manage with optional statutes, no processes, buying stuff for fictions. At cost plus profits and all the “do overs” the careers need to get to retirement.
They make up the manning documents, for recondite highly variable processes with no input from work load factors, or functional equivalencies. Then they assigned the work to advisory and assistance services contractors (retired insiders) because of the rarity of working civil servants protected (also fiction, if you are a whistleblower needing the protections will age and bankrupt you) by merit systems with the KSA’s to go along with the fictions, hard to get someone who actually worked in the real world to go along to get along.
What they do is make work for each other no process, no product and keep each other busy guarding their faults and failures.
Churchill put it nicely:
“A precious truth must be protected by a bodyguard of lies.”
The guards are generals and SES’, also lots of GS 15’s.
Ah, I see. They are designing a new wardrobe for the Emperor. And, you’re right. Special, highly specialized KSA’s. And, very talented SES and GS-15 weavers, pattern makers, tailors and shoemakers. I see a burning need for the very best invisible garments ever made. Expense, be damned! Ja, ilsm? NancyO
Huckabee is NOT running!
Kewl. And…? NancyO
Yup! And is appropriate at this junction.
I think the Consumer Financial protection bureau should start with adds saying to not trust any salesmen of financial products any further than you would trust a used car salesman (it may be unfair to the used car salesman). Also add a new form to closing to show if the mortgage would have been issued under the guidelines of the 1970, and have folks sign an acknowledgement that a mortgage is risky if the mortgage does not meet those guidelines. Essentially teach folks that the financial world is full of sharks of various kinds and to trust no one who gets anything like a commission on the product. If you pay someone who is not on commission for advice perhaps its ok. Free advice is further worth only what you paid for it.
Well put can I quote you?
Number of Congress members who gave up some portion of their 2010 salary for federal debt reduction: 3
Total amount of these gifts: $15,223.56
Amount of federal money that went to National Public Radio in 2010: $2.7M
To Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University: $446M
-courtesy Harper’s Index June 2011
Smoke and Mirrors:
Analyses coming out about the Obama cutting $400B from the baseline 6,000B outlandish 12 year DoD spending whims.
Nothing is firm, but it sounds like things are on the drawing board which are ficititious deisre which will be counted as savings. There appears also to be a few hoped for terminations rare events indeed where the planned spending is claimed as reduction, even though the desriement is still funded in a new name, but at a earlier R&D budget.
The only reasonable way to cut DoD is talk readiness and presence.
But BBO reports there is no way to make heads nor tailed about the impacts, there are none, to cutting readiness and presence.
And they do not balance their books in the pentagon…….
PJR, who or what? Perhaps why? No care!
They’re dropping like flies! Now, Trump is out. Anyone surprised? I’m not!
Excellent blog read guys thanks a lot