Couldn’t Help But Notice (012208)
Walter Williams, in a thoroughly excellent Townhall column, interrupts the hysteria over the economy to describe the impacts of what is being considered to “fix” the mortgage market situation, even though in historical context it’s not as bad as it was in other times (bold is mine):
The Bush bailout, as well as Federal Reserve Bank cuts in interest rates, is a wealth transfer from creditworthy people and taxpayers to those who made ill-advised credit decisions, and that includes banks as well as borrowers. According to Temple University professor of economics William Dunkelberg, 96 percent of all mortgages are being paid on time. Thirty percent of American homeowners have no mortgage. Delinquency rates were higher in the 1980s than they are today. Only 2 to 3 percent of all mortgages are in foreclosure. The government bailout helps a few people at a huge cost to the rest of the economy.
Williams wrote the above before this morning’s announcement of the 3/4-point Fed rate cut. The professor is correct that this is a wealth transfer, IF Bernanke & Co. are cutting rates beyond what is necessary to keep the whole economy going. I would suggest that at least a third of today’s announced cut is just that.
____________________________________________________
Dennis Prager has never been accused of being pro-abortion, which is why this passage from his latest column deserves attention:
In fact, if it is Ronald Reagan that Republicans want, Giuliani is extraordinarily close to that venerated man. Ronald Reagan stood for two great beliefs: that big government is a big problem for a free society and that America must be militarily strong and lead the war against global communism.
Substitute “global jihadism” for “global communism” and you have Rudy Giuliani’s twin pillars. His one major weakness in appealing to all conservatives is that he is for abortion rights. Let me, then, briefly address all those who, like me, consider nearly all abortions immoral.
Ronald Reagan was pro-life, and it mattered little to the pro-life cause. Concerning abortion, what matters most in a president is the type of judges he appoints to the Supreme Court. As George Will wrote on behalf of Giuliani, “The way to change abortion law is to change courts by means of judicial nominations of the sort Giuliani promises to make.” It is extremely unlikely that John McCain would appoint similarly conservative judges. After all, why would he appoint judges like Scalia and Alito who apparently differ with him on the constitutionality of McCain’s own “campaign finance reform” laws?
Pro-life Republicans need to ask themselves: Will a Democrat or Giuliani as president render abortion less common in America? The best is the enemy of the better. And Giuliani is far better on abortion than any Democratic nominee.
The big question is whether you can trust Giuliani when he says he will nominate strict constructionist judges. I would suggest that, like his positions or not, at least you know where Rudy stands. What you see is what you get, and based on his career, what he promises is what you’ll get. With the Three Stooges, who knows?
_________________________________________________
Here’s a tax loophole that should be plugged (HT Instapundit). I would note that while there are many universities earning unrelated business income and not paying taxes, the Christian Broadcasting Network is at the top of the list referred to. I should also note that what the list refers to as “total income from business activities” is probably tax-speak for “revenues,” not “profit.”
_________________________________________________
From Michigan:
Michigan will no longer let illegal immigrants get driver’s licenses, a practice just seven other states continue to allow.
Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah and Washington do not require drivers to prove legal status to obtain a license.
How did that go unnoticed?










As to the current proposed solution being floated for a non-existing recession I am very leary. It gives me great pause for concern that giving $800 per adult filer will set the precedent for the future. Listening to Schumer the other day on Fox, there would be a cap or targeted income group to direct the money to thus cutting out the upper class. Giving money directly from the Treasury in the form of a means tested rebate is a Dems redistributionist’s wet dream come true and smacks of pump priming the economy. Our consolation is that at least if they choose to pump prime, the money going directly to the individual would be better spent than pork barrel projects stuffing the pockets of monied interests who happen to be big political contributors of the politicians voting for this.
The difference here between the proposed rebate versus a tax cut is that government has confiscated money via taxes and redistributed them in a planned economic fashion in what I would consider the least efficacious manner. Taking money from those who are the most efficent at creating wealth, and then giving it to the least productive members of society in terms of creating wealth is extremely short sighted. I am really surprised that W and McCain have signed on this pact with the devil (Dems).
IMO, the 3/4 % rate drop was the right thing for the Fed to do since this will ripple to the ARMS and subprime market where the problem started in the first place. I am personally against any broad money give away, the issue is not money in people hands, it’s the liquidity of the housing market caused by too tight of lending terms. Foreclosures would not be an issue if people could get loans to buy houses. The only way to pry open the Bankers pockets is for the Fed to lower the reserve requirements, which they in effect have done by lowering the discount rate.
Comment by dscott — January 22, 2008 @ 12:40 pm
#1, there should be a three-part answer:
- Immediate stimulus, one-time.
- Make 2003 tax system permanent (known to most as “make Bush cuts permanent).
- Across the board permanent 10% reduction in rates — no exceptions. Top rate drops to 31.5%, bottom rate drops to 9%.
That does short-term and long-term good and institutionalizes a tolerable rate system.
Comment by TBlumer — January 22, 2008 @ 2:03 pm