This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Understanding Unintended Consequences
As you get older and start thinking more, you realize there are more layers to even seemingly straightforward problems. When you are young, solutions are simple: If drugs are bad, we should make them illegal and put people in jail for using them. Or if we need to raise revenue, we should raise taxes on everyone, especially the rich. Perhaps this is the logic behind the saying, "If you are young and not liberal, then you have no heart; but if you are old and not conservative, then you have no brain." Once you've been around the block and seen enough shenanigans, you realize things aren't so simple. When you're young, you're what I like to call a do-gooder; you don't even realize there is such a thing as unintended consequences.
Unintended consequences come in many forms. There are unintended consequences in our foreign policy, such as those that came from the CIA-led overthrow of the democratically elected Prime Minister of Iran. We put the brutish Shah of Iran in power, making the Iranian people suffer for 26 years, which led to the radical movement there and the instability in the Middle East. Unintended consequence. The average person my age thinks I'm making these kind of things up because they don't read. I let them wallow in their ignorance- these are generally accepted historical facts that you must know and accept to peer into the future. If you don't have the ability to objectively view history, then you will not be able to see what's coming; you are too biased.
Then there are finance and economics-related unintended consequences. For example, if our leaders fear a stock market crash, they ban short selling. Little do they realize that short sellers are the only buyers in a panic and that stocks fall like a rock without short sellers. Or better yet, we overregulate markets with Sarbanes-Oxley to the point that new companies don't want to do business here. Solutions like these evidence a complete lack of knowledge of markets. This is the hallmark of government- they graduate with degrees in law and think they can preside over an economy. Who are they fooling?
Our leaders are clueless and you will be hard-pressed to find one politician, besides Ron Paul, who saw this crisis coming. Most politicians have their focus on the wrong problem. The debate now is whether we should raise taxes on the rich or not. Well let me tell you, the rich happen to be the movers and shakers in the economy who create jobs; they can easily take their businesses abroad if they have to. By raising taxes in the hopes of boosting revenue, we will likely do the exact opposite. Instead of attacking domestic capital, we should worry about the problem of sending hundreds of billions of dollars abroad annually to service our debt to foreigners. It is the debt that is going to bring this ship down.
The worst is yet to come because our leaders don't know how to deal with this debt crisis. Cut spending and you will see a dramatic rise in unemployment from the public sector and civil unrest. Raise taxes and you will see rising unemployment, slower economic growth, and a flight of capital abroad. Print money and kick the can down the road and you will see most assets, including stocks, go to record highs. Because this cycle will be one where people generally lose their faith in government, gold is going to rise even higher in percentage terms than most assets. I feel like this is 2007 all over again: the storm clouds are painfully obvious, I'm warning everyone around me about what's coming, but people are too apathetic to prepare or they flat-out don't believe me. Fine. Let's see how this plays out; I am positive the magnitude of this crisis will be shocking.
Article taken from Expected Returns Blog.
- advertisements -
No I don't want to do any more homework. I did all mine after the act passed, and before I left.
That particular piece of legislation couldn't have more holes in it for US citizens if it was written by Jeff Ibanker Immelt himself. Ironically, the group most directly fucked by it was green-card holding imported labor. Where it gets really twisted is when the attractiveness of the US Companies (in the US) as a destination for foreign skilled labor is reduced, US Companies actually seeking such labor have a stronger case for exporting jobs, indirectly fucking US job seekers.
So I'll stand by careless or stupid. The US government wants to roll $14.5 trillion in debt and spend an $3.8T in FY2011. Beginning in 2009, the top 1% was paying more in income taxes than the bottom 95% of earners (top 1% > 40%, bottom 95% < 40%). If the top 1% leave the US then 40% of the income tax burden must be redistributed across the remaining population. The only other option is increased borrowing, but borrowing cost is a function of perceived ability to repay, and if the income generating capacity of the US is reduced, then borrowing costs will rise (either nominally or through inflation if the debt is monetized as opposed to sold) necessitating even higher tax rates. It is a vicious cycle of economic feedback.
+1
How will the former middle class be able to then carry out its pogrom on them once the whole damn lie comes flying apart?
I mean, who's got money nowadays to fly to Monte Carlo to beat their asses? LOL
They will hoard their fiat until all lose complete confidence in all currency and then, they will no longer be rich. Just sitting on stacks of fire starters for 50 gallon drums.
Can somebody please enlighten me as to what idiom Obama is even referring to when he says it's time we eat our peas? I have no idea what he is talking about there. ~ Thanks.
Clearly, he meant "eat our vegetables." Once again, we're children who need to be told.
He could have as easily said "broccoli," but the connection to the arguments against ObamaCare would bring up some "unintended consequences."
First off I will presume you are young. Second off, you made a very good question.
Peas were pretty common because they were cheap in the can. Or straight from a field.
Usually at the dinner table the peas were saved until last because as a kid, I did not like peas much. Having both parents threaten me with corner time or a loss of TV time etc resulted in grudgenly eating the now cold peas.
If you are going to eat peas, get some butter on them or something else to wash em down like mashed potatoes or something.
There is another way to look at peas. To that end you would want to google a Civil War era song called "Goober Peas" The lyrics is self explainatory even when the Yankees are approaching, the Georgia boys still have time to finish the peas before going on the line.
Substitute 'peas' for 'fecces' and I think we start getting to the true meaning.
Austerity Bitchez.
Sorry: My first 'bitchez' yet.......everyone gets their turn.
I am NuckingFuts and I support this message.
Oh, now I get it.
The president's telling us middle class folks to bend over and take it up the ass again.
Whatta guy whatta guy whatta guy
Or am I missing something?
Like the KY
Which reminds me about the fellow who was in hospital. One of his mates comes sees him and asks who everyting's being. The room... ah cold then hot, then cold then hot. The nurses... ah, surly. The doctor... lousy bedside manner. The food... lousy... except that Kentucky jelly is pretty good.
The've played every card they can to keep the game going, and it's not working anymore. The western banking system will go into default sooner rather than later and they are getting ready for this to happen (more police, less freedoms), because they know that once those govt. checks stop going out people will riot.
Unintended Consequences is the politically correct moniker for the inability to think critically.
BTW, and I'll take all the junks for this, Ron Paul is not the second coming. Insightful, would be a great executive advisor, but does not have the leadership gravitas. My two cents.
The best of a pitiful field at this time--but i agree completely. Milestones
Ron Paul is the best GOP candidate, the only sane and free market financially sound one amongst them ...which is why he is continually marginalised in the world of feeding parasite sponsors from societies pockets
as for Obumma a pig with lipstick could beat this toxic bankers rent-boy... the leftie voters of America are like star struck rabbits right now sure to turn to anger.. he sold them on the big socialist dream (State peace, largesse and solving the economy)... even these deluded souls must now realise they've been sold the biggest Pump & Dump corporate puppet in US history ...Obumma is a toxic Massiah, 'toast'
(i'm taking bets if anyone thinks he has more than a snowball in hells chance of winning)
In order for him to not win, he has to lose against someone. I'm of the opinion that he will win. Not because I believe his worthless drivel (actually, I do. I just believe the opposite of what he says). But because people really are that stupid.
The "liberals" I know, seem willfully ignorant of the fact that O is just another puppet. It's either that or they support him because he's NOT white. Nevermind anything else, he's not whitey. Even plenty of white people STILL believe this shit.
In the end, I don't see it making any difference who gets elected. If Dr. Paul got elected, he'd either be neutered by a fully captured congress and court, or they'd do him like they did Kennedy. Any other Demican or Republicrat would just mean the same as it has since Kennedy.
Odds? ..you mean like 0.000% chance of winning!!
Malikai, remember Obumma despite the biggest pre-campaign press build-up in US election history, the most biased media in US history, despite out-spending McCain $3 to $1, despite McCain having to carry the ultra-negative Bush legacy and despite being the most wooden plank of a performer was LEADING by 2% half way through the campaign with the simplistic "Drill Baby Drill" motto that hit an American nerve.
McCain being a progressive moron lost that 2% lead when he turned coat and wimpered back to Washington because he "must be there" to aid the bailouts. If he'd stayed true to the right and anti-bailout he would have won (fact)
Obumma didn't win it despite all the vast overwhelming factors on his side, it was McCains for the taking, he 'lost it' going pro-bailout (check the date the Polls swung and McCain lost his lead) ...Obumma won by a cats whisker 2% a typically pathetic result for all the money, press and bias he had on his side.. socialism's fuking expensive to keep afloat
GOP needs only put lipstick on a pig and teach it to say "Drill Baby Drill" to answer every question and the American voting public will go batty over it... and face facts it wouldn't be any dumber than any other Republican President put in Office
You make some good points that I can't argue against.
Tell me something. Did you get the feeling that even FauX was promoting O during the campaign? I did. They were doing it in a sort of dualistic way that is hard to quantify, but I got the feeling that they themselves wanted O to win. And by "they", I mean the newsmakers in Newscorp.
If your observations are correct, and O is to be dismissed, I would expect the same behaviour from the MSNBC/CNN crowd towards whichever puppet the Republicrats put forward this time around.
odds?
Interestingly, you dissed Paul but didn't suggest who would be a better candidate.
Unless you do more than snipe, you deserve to get junked.
There is no better candidate, but he's not a choice for me, only a default option.
I'll have to watch this one without voting, again.
I wish I could find someone that I wanted to vote for-----what happened to this country?
Ok, Mr. wise guy. Ever see a pitch-out in baseball where the runner gets nailed betwen first and second? Hold that thought and let's see if you can extend that logic here:
The article says, correctly, that Paul was one of the few if not only politicians to see the crisis coming. If you agree, read on...
Yet we have a financial crisis of unprecedented proportions, no? Here's the punch line...
How much sway and leadership does a guy have who can't do anything about what only he saw coming? (He saw the steal sign in the dugout but could't convince the battery to pitch out)
For the same reason - inability to effect what is needed to be done - Paul will not be elected.
I don't think the election of the next President - if the country holds together that long - matters unless there is an attendent complete and total blood transfusion in Congress.
And so you don't accuse me of skirting your question, I don't think any of the announced candidates is a great one. Nor do I think any of them is going to win. And I don't think any of them is going to be running against Obama...
And speaking of "snipe," better do somethin' about that hole in your head.
Well said +1.
As much as I love Ron Paul and believe that he deserves your vote, he has as much chance as Greek 63 year old with a big mortgage getting a job right now.
In the meantime, we are already past the cross roads. Insert a Stevy Ray video if you must, but we have some shit coming our way.
I N C E P T I O N