Saturday, October 30, 2010

An Election Weekend Special Edition

“It’s time for a center right party that is truly fiscally conservative, truly believes in limited government and is truly socially liberal. A party that is interested in reaching the Center as much as it is in reaching the Right.”
Anyone who reads this blog from time to time knows that I don’t lack for opinions. Or as my third grade teacher put it to me, “you have an answer for everything”. I thought that was the idea.

However, this weekend I am stumped on one big issue. So, I am posting this a bit off schedule. Why? Because I need your answers to a question to inform me before I go to the polls.

By way of background, I should tell you that most of my friends and colleagues are Republicans. I am a businessman and that’s who I hang around with. So, over these last few weeks, I have asked many of them this question:

The pollsters have been telling us that the nation’s voters are center-right. Specifically, they are fiscally conservative and socially liberal. So, why is it that Tea Party, right wing conservative Republican candidate, Marco Rubio, is leading independent, fiscally conservative, socially liberal, Charlie Crist, in the polls in one of the biggest swing states in the country?

Most of the answers I get are incomprehensible. Not that I don’t understand what the responder is saying. Just that the responses make no sense.

Got a clue? If so, I want to hear from you. Please scan down to Comments to leave your reply.

And, no matter what you think, please vote on Tuesday, November 2.

Monday, October 25, 2010

It Doesn't Sound So Loonie to Me.....

"Both Parties seem to be infected with, among other maladies, an acute case of Not Invented Here-itis…."

 David Hay, Chief Investment Officer of Evergreen Capital Management

I have endeavored to bring a new twist to each topic as I write this almost weekly blog. However, this week I feel compelled to bring you the writings of other bloggers more famous than I (which is almost everyone).

Among my readings is a weekly newsletter published by John Mauldin. He is a conservative economist with a compelling writing style, making complex concepts digestible for the lay reader. Last week’s letter from Mr. Mauldin incorporated a letter from his colleague, the Chief Investment Officer of Evergreen Capital Management, David Hay. My blog today will provide you with a link to Mauldin’s letter. So, technically we have a blog within a blog within a blog. To read it, click HERE.

Here are a few teasers. Did you know that our northern neighbor, Canada, was in worse fiscal shape than we are in the mid-1990’s? Did you know that they have now produced 11 years of balanced budgets? Neither did I. What was I doing in 1995 when the Wall Street Journal declared that Canada had become “an honorary member of the Third World in the unmanageability of its debt problem”? Who knows? I only know I wasn’t watching when they began a remarkable turnaround. How bad was it?

 The Canadian dollar was known as either the “Loonie” after the bird on its dollar coin or the “Northern Peso”.
 The government accounted for 53% of the country’s GDP.
 Government debt was 120% of GDP or about twice the level of the US today.

The Canadian turnaround is perhaps the most remarkable economic achievement of any industrial economy since WWII. The new Canadian budget reduced spending by 8.8% over two years while reducing federal employment by 14%. Corporate tax rates were reduced by roughly 30%. Personal income and capital gains taxes were cut and a Value Added Tax (VAT) was implemented to cover the revenue lost by other tax reductions.

What were the results? Drum roll please…. The federal budget was balanced within three years and federal debt dropped to 45% of GDP.

Admittedly, there a few salient points missing from Hay’s summary. Canada fixed its problems during a booming decade for the global economy. And, they were aided by the passage of NAFTA which resulted in US car companies moving much of their production to Canada. They did so because the Canadian taxpayer picked up the tab for healthcare. They are still the country from whom we import the most goods and services (not China). Exporting economies have much less to worry about than importers like the US.

Still, when you look at what they have accomplished compared to our own domestic quagmire, you have to ask, WHO WILL LEAD?

Monday, October 11, 2010

Let’s Put the Washington Back in D.C.

“Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism.”                               

                                                    -- George Washington

Most people know that our first President, George Washington, played a critical role in keeping the union from splitting apart. He was well respected by both the industrial north and the agrarian south. Were it not for his leadership, the United States may not have survived as a single country.

What few remember from their history lessons was Washington’s support of a treaty which made a truce with the British in the first decade of our republic. It was controversial because following the Revolutionary War, the British continued to attack our commercial shipping and occupied posts in the Northwest Territory.

Nevertheless, our first president knew that the flood of immigrants from Europe would continue to press our borders westward. The British presence there would eventually lead to another war. He also knew that, with the treasury weakened by debts owed to foreign governments from the country’s recent victory, the U.S. could not win another war with the Brits.

The treaty called for reduced maritime commerce by U.S. merchant ships; however, the British would abandon their western forts. It was highly unpopular. Many in Congress called for a declaration of war. The public was outraged. The treaty’s author, John Jay, was stoned in public. Protests spread throughout the land. Pamphleteers, the cable news pundits of their day, urged “a speedy death to General Washington!”

President Washington was resolute. The treaty opened up the western territories and their economic possibilities and gave the U.S. time to build up its treasury to prepare for the British war that he knew was inevitable. When it happened in 1812, we were ready.

Washington’s courage and leadership was missing when the House passed the Currency Reform for Fair Trade Act last week. It seems that we have entered the silly season on Capitol Hill. It’s only a month before the election and who would run the risk of not voting for a bill that penalizes the Chinese for their unfair practices. No one involved really believes that passage of this bill will bring jobs back from China. When China allows its currency to appreciate (yes, I said when not if), low skill manufacturing jobs will go to other low wage countries like Vietnam and Indonesia. They will not come back to the U.S.

But, the public needs a villain and better a foreign power than a politician running for reelection. The bill, if enacted, would have the effect of a tariff on Chinese goods. (All this talk of tariffs and balanced budgets reminds me of Herbert Hoover!!)

The U.S. is still the world’s largest economy, most powerful military player and influential society. This won’t last if we continue to behave as though it’s still the Twentieth Century. It’s time to start looking forward and plan according to our current reality.

It is fairly well known that the Chinese treasury holds more than seven times the dollar reserves of our own Federal Reserve Bank. China invests those dollars in US Treasuries, its infrastructure and enterprises around the world. They seek to advance their own economy but not to destroy the U.S., the largest market for its goods. Despite their growing wealth, they still have deep systemic problems, the solutions to which are difficult to develop in a closed society. The key to remaining competitive is not for the U.S. to hamper trade but to embrace it.

Historically, our economic success has resulted from openness to immigration and trade, superior education and extraordinary innovation, all of which led to the most productive economy in the world. Our economic power is projected throughout the world by global corporations – GE, Microsoft, and McDonald’s. Yet, we seem consumed by fear -- fear of terrorists, rogue nations, foreign investment, free trade, immigrants and the U.N. Why do we see ourselves as threatened by forces beyond our control? Because politicians and their willing accomplices in the media have convinced us we should be afraid.

The 1990’s provided an historic opportunity for both major parties to forge a path to the future. In the wake of the Cold War, the Republican revolution of 1994 was founded in Newt Gingrich’s Contract With America. It built upon Reagan’s legacy and provided a construct for governing in the 21st Century. Similarly, Bill Clinton transformed the old liberal agenda by declaring that with rights come responsibilities. The philosophy of communitarianism was one of his hallmarks. He championed free trade and forged new agreements that enabled it.

So, why this bill at this time? Because politicians get elected by telling us what to be afraid of and who to blame.

America doesn’t succeed because of laws that hamper commerce; we succeed because of the historic vitality of our society. We thrive because of our openness to the world – to immigration, to innovation and to other cultures.

So, if you are looking for the answer to our question, “WHO WILL LEAD?” when you go to the polls this year, you might want to start with the list of Congressmen who voted against the Currency Reform for Fair Trade Act. You can find them by clicking right here.

Monday, October 4, 2010

Every Dogma Has Its Day

It is common sense to take a method and try it. If it fails, admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something.   Franklin D. Roosevelt





If you're afraid of the future, then get out of the way, stand aside. The people of this country are ready to move again.   Ronald Reagan