Free kibbles

TAX AND SPEND:

Rumor has it Boehner has agreed to new taxes. While that doesn't surprise me in the least because Boehner's a rat, I don't know if that will fly. I still think there's a good chance no deal will get done and Obama will raise debt ceiling on his own citing the 14th amendment.

That story I quoted above was from yesterday. As I commented, I was skeptical. Here's the news from today:

"House Speaker John Boehner informed President Barack Obama Saturday that a smaller agreement of about $2 trillion was more realistic."

From another article:

"House Speaker John Boehner’s surprise announcement late Saturday that he was abandoning efforts to reach a comprehensive budget agreement brings a sudden end to what may have been the best opportunity in years to deal with the country’s looming fiscal crisis."

In other words, the grand bargain he was looking for that I was skeptical would ever happen, won't happen. I don't want to break my arm patting myself on the back, but this seems simple to understand. The "experts" who are expert in nothing but being political hacks thought it would happen. But the dirty little secret about politics in America is, given time to consider an issue, the people matter. Sure, politicians can railroad the government into TARP before the people can rally to stop them. They can railroad the government into Libya before the people can stop them. But when you give the people time to evaluate the cost and benefit of any government action, they usually realize the cost outweighs the benefit. The rare exceptions are wars. I think it's more likely than ever that both parties will refuse a deal and force Obama to play the 14th amendment card.

I think this is more evidence that no deal will get done and both parties will force Obama to play the 14th amendment card. I'm beginning to thing this is a fait accompli, i.e. scam, and the two parties are going through the motions to reconcile the people. I think the fix is in.

This is a smoke screen. Both parties will refuse to make a deal. Obama will raise the debt ceiling by presidential fiat citing the 14th amendment. Democrats will rejoice in private and public. Republicans will rejoice in private and attack Obama in public. Both sides get to play to their constituents. The more I think about it, the more obvious it is that this is the favored solution for every aristocrat and none of the people, so it will be done.

Gary North writes about government default and the accounting games Lord Geithner is playing, but is argument makes no sense.

"There are two funds involved: the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund and the Thrift Savings Plan's Government Securities Investment Fund, known as the G Fund.

"Federal retirees and employees will be unaffected by these actions," Geithner wrote in a letter to lawmakers earlier this week. By law, those accounts must eventually be made whole. The department took similar "extraordinary measures" in 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2006; each time, the G Fund and the CSRDF were made whole with back interest once the ceiling was raised.
"Federal retirees and employees will be unaffected by these actions," Geithner wrote in a letter to lawmakers earlier this week. By law, those accounts must eventually be made whole. The department took similar "extraordinary measures" in 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2006; each time, the G Fund and the CSRDF were made whole with back interest once the ceiling was raised.
No one is using the D-word: default, but this is what the procedure really is. This has gone on so often in the past that no one in Washington blinks an eye. It's business as usual. The government pretends that the legal IOUs that it has been presenting to the funds in exchange for real money have been wiped off the books. This is solvency, Washington style."

Both are invested in government bonds, which count as borrowing against the national debt ceiling. Under the Treasury Department's strategy, the government trims the two funds' holdings in those bonds. For the 2½-month period from mid-May until Aug. 2, that's supposed to free up about $214 billion in "headroom" against the debt ceiling, thus allowing the government to borrow a similar amount of money from other sources to keep paying its bills.

No. To paraphrase the Italian swordsman from the Princess Bride, I don't think the word default means what you think it means. Default happens when you can't pay off your debts. As long as people loan you money, you don't default. You don't win any points by playing semantic games. You can argue the government defaults by inflating the currency. You can argue it defaults by failing to meet its obligations. But you can't argue that it defaults by borrowing more money. That's not accurate.

"The public does not understand any of this. It also does not understand that the Social Security Trust Fund is a pile of IOUs from the government. Even worse, these IOUs are not counted as on-budget. They are off-budget."

I completely disagree. First, I believe many of the people know that all that's in the supposed Social Security trust fund is IOUs. Send, I believe everybody knows that those IOUs are not the same as default because the government is still managing to send out checks.

And Karen Kwiatkowski follows North's exaggeration.

"As Gary North has noted, the great 21^st century default of the U.S. government has already started, with the raiding of federal pension funds to stay solvent a few months ago."

This contradicts what North said about history:

"The department took similar "extraordinary measures" in 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2006; each time, the G Fund and the CSRDF were made whole with back interest once the ceiling was raised."

You can't say government defaulted all those times. If it had, people would have been robbed of their pensions. That didn't happen because the government borrowed more money and made them whole. Until we see otherwise, we have to expect the same will happen this time. If that doesn't happen, I'll change my tune, but until then, I stand on the side of history. North might as well said the great default started in 2002, but it didn't because the government borrowed to make pensions whole. The great default no more started in 2011 than it started in 2002. This is just another debate the two parties are using to divide us, and the debt limit will be raised.

WAR ON DRUGS:

The US war on drugs has prompted the murder of 40 Mexicans in 24 hours. To steal a phrase from our criminal-in-chief, let's be clear. Absent the war on drugs in the US, none of these people would have been murdered. The same for the hundreds of thousands before. All these murders to protect the profits and paychecks of the criminals who profit from this war of aggression.

Obama has the DEA decree that marijuana has no medical use in order to overcome any state rights claims to legalizing medical marijuana.

POLICE STATE:

Heinz Ward was arrested for the non-crime of drunk driving. I'm sure we'll see the usual mea culpa like he murdered somebody. There's no such thing as a victimless crime. Ward is a victim of the state, and the state will steal a lot of money from him for this.

WAR:

I don't know if I've ever heard a politician talk of "defeating al Qaeda".

"The United States is "within reach of strategically defeating al Qaeda," Leon Panetta declared, as he traveled to Afghanistan for his first visit there as Secretary of Defense."

It's a good sound bite for the new defense secretary, and no doubt that information was a treasure trove. But it could have been obtained without assassinating him. Further, it could have been obtained years ago if we had unleashed entrepreneurs to hunt him down instead of relying on socialist security services. And he was smart enough to qualify his terms because you can't defeat hatred and a desire to kill based on it.

Marines using X-rays to detect failures in body armor. I think they should do that while marines aren't being ordered to kill and die in foreign countries for the benefit of the ruling class.

POLITICS:

This New Hampshire straw poll is meaningless. Apparently last year, Ron Paul won with 65 percent of the vote, and he went nowhere.

"UPDATE Ron wins! With 39% of the vote."

I appreciate Lew Rockwell's enthusiasm and Ron Paul's principled and tenacious work, but it's unlikely, with Rockwell and his supporters advocating against voting, Paul will win enough votes to make his effort worthwhile. Frankly, it seems bizarre to me how Rockwell cheerleads for Paul while advocating nobody vote for him. The more people Paul reaches with his ideas, the better, but the more votes he gets, the more people he will reach. Rockwell and Co.s principled stand against voting is like a principled stand against not carrying guns. It makes all of us victims.

Email to Rockwell about voting:

"A vote, like a gun, is a tool. Both can be used for aggression or defense. Granted, in a free society, a vote is only a tool for aggression, but I'm more likely to grow wings than we are to live in a free society in the next decade. Our votes can limit the power of aggressors just like our guns. In our society which is dominated by government violence, unilateral disarmament just leads to worse oppression. Ron Paul is not a predator like every other Republican or Democrat. Voting for him helps defend us from the predators."

He won't respond. I'm sure he's heard every decent argument for voting over the last 40 years. He disagrees. But as long as there's a pro-liberty candidate out there, I'll keep trying.

LOCAL:

Maybe this is standard in bigger cities, but my girlfriend and I saw a cop sitting at the local biker bar we occasionally visit tonight wearing a secret service earpiece. It was a very bizarre experience all around. First the cop was in full uniform sitting at the bar drinking drinks. Second, he was wearing a secret service earpiece that was apparently so new it bugged him because he kept messing with it. Third, everybody in the bar was enamored with him like he was a celebrity. All three things were new to me. And I'm no stranger to bars. It was creepy.

Amateur astronomer wants to steal money from his fellow citizens to build an observatory. Why not? It's way easier than actually raising the funds voluntarily. Wouldn't it be cool if you could get the government to steal funds from your fellow citizens to pay for your favorite hobby?

"“I believe the geeky community in Warren County is very substantial,” said Commissioner Dave Young. “I think the level of private support you can find for this will be very high.”"

Then let them pay for it voluntarily.

"Blazey appeared before the county commissioners Tuesday to request financial assistance in raising the approximately $56,000 to construct an observatory building."

Screw that. It's way easier to ask the criminals in charge of the county to funnel $56 grand of their stolen loot to your project instead of trying to raise the funds privately through voluntary contributions. Our schools and system of government teaches kids to be crooks. No wonder our society is degenerating.

MISC:

Great comic of Jesus turning a loaf of bread into many loaves mocks IP crowd.

Nice job by the Yankee's fan who ended up with Derek Jeter's 3,000 hit ball.

Nice graphic of 30 years of market innovation versus government stagnation.

I've had millions of jellyfish keep me from swimming in the ocean several times, but I've never heard of them shutting down nuclear power plants.