Libya August 23, 2011March 24, 2017 Never been there, know little about it. Yet I can’t help thinking the President’s Cairo ‘New Beginnings’ speech improved Mid-East perceptions of the U.S. and may even have had something to do with the Arab Spring. Can you imagine such a speech by Mitt Romney or Rick Perry? I can’t help thinking that the way the Obama team went after Bin Laden was more cost-effective than that of his predecessor. I can’t help thinking that our handling of Qaddafi and Libya has thus far worked out well. (Here‘s Steve Clemons’ analysis to that effect.) What if we had taken this Qaddafi approach with Saddam Hussein and Iraq? In any event, it prompted me to go back and read that Cairo speech, part of which I offer here: … So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, those who promote conflict rather than the cooperation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity. And this cycle of suspicion and discord must end. I’ve come here to Cairo to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world, one based on mutual interest and mutual respect, and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles — principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings. I do so recognizing that change cannot happen overnight. I know there’s been a lot of publicity about this speech, but no single speech can eradicate years of mistrust, nor can I answer in the time that I have this afternoon all the complex questions that brought us to this point. But I am convinced that in order to move forward, we must say openly to each other the things we hold in our hearts and that too often are said only behind closed doors. There must be a sustained effort to listen to each other; to learn from each other; to respect one another; and to seek common ground. As the Holy Koran tells us, “Be conscious of God and speak always the truth.” (Applause.) That is what I will try to do today — to speak the truth as best I can, humbled by the task before us, and firm in my belief that the interests we share as human beings are far more powerful than the forces that drive us apart. Now part of this conviction is rooted in my own experience. I’m a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims. As a boy, I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaan at the break of dawn and at the fall of dusk. As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith. As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam. It was Islam — at places like Al-Azhar — that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe’s Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities — (applause) — it was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality. (Applause.) I also know that Islam has always been a part of America’s story. The first nation to recognize my country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second President, John Adams, wrote, “The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims.” And since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States. They have fought in our wars, they have served in our government, they have stood for civil rights, they have started businesses, they have taught at our universities, they’ve excelled in our sports arenas, they’ve won Nobel Prizes, built our tallest building, and lit the Olympic Torch. And when the first Muslim American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our Constitution using the same Holy Koran that one of our Founding Fathers — Thomas Jefferson — kept in his personal library. (Applause.) So I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed. That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn’t. And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear. (Applause.) But that same principle must apply to Muslim perceptions of America. (Applause.) Just as Muslims do not fit a crude stereotype, America is not the crude stereotype of a self-interested empire. The United States has been one of the greatest sources of progress that the world has ever known. We were born out of revolution against an empire. We were founded upon the ideal that all are created equal, and we have shed blood and struggled for centuries to give meaning to those words — within our borders, and around the world. We are shaped by every culture, drawn from every end of the Earth, and dedicated to a simple concept: E pluribus unum — “Out of many, one.” Now, much has been made of the fact that an African American with the name Barack Hussein Obama could be elected President. (Applause.) But my personal story is not so unique. The dream of opportunity for all people has not come true for everyone in America, but its promise exists for all who come to our shores — and that includes nearly 7 million American Muslims in our country today who, by the way, enjoy incomes and educational levels that are higher than the American average. (Applause.) Moreover, freedom in America is indivisible from the freedom to practice one’s religion. That is why there is a mosque in every state in our union, and over 1,200 mosques within our borders. That’s why the United States government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab and to punish those who would deny it. (Applause.) So let there be no doubt: Islam is a part of America. And I believe that America holds within her the truth that regardless of race, religion, or station in life, all of us share common aspirations — to live in peace and security; to get an education and to work with dignity; to love our families, our communities, and our God. These things we share. This is the hope of all humanity. Of course, recognizing our common humanity is only the beginning of our task. Words alone cannot meet the needs of our people. These needs will be met only if we act boldly in the years ahead; and if we understand that the challenges we face are shared, and our failure to meet them will hurt us all. … … I know there has been controversy about the promotion of democracy in recent years, and much of this controversy is connected to the war in Iraq. So let me be clear: No system of government can or should be imposed by one nation by any other. That does not lessen my commitment, however, to governments that reflect the will of the people. Each nation gives life to this principle in its own way, grounded in the traditions of its own people. America does not presume to know what is best for everyone, just as we would not presume to pick the outcome of a peaceful election. But I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn’t steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. These are not just American ideas; they are human rights. And that is why we will support them everywhere. (Applause.) Now, there is no straight line to realize this promise. But this much is clear: Governments that protect these rights are ultimately more stable, successful and secure. Suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. America respects the right of all peaceful and law-abiding voices to be heard around the world, even if we disagree with them. And we will welcome all elected, peaceful governments — provided they govern with respect for all their people. This last point is important because there are some who advocate for democracy only when they’re out of power; once in power, they are ruthless in suppressing the rights of others. (Applause.) So no matter where it takes hold, government of the people and by the people sets a single standard for all who would hold power: You must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party. …
If It Had Been Hillary August 22, 2011March 24, 2017 WHEELTUG It seems to me there is a reasonable chance this will continue to inch forward to a good outcome. Here’s the latest; ten minutes for the optimists in the crowd. How you rate the chance of success – 50%? 2%? – is one piece of the valuation puzzle. Being an optimist, I’m up around 50%. What success would be worth – $500 million? $25 million? – is another. Being an optimist, I’m up around $500 million. And what the residual fall-out from a good outcome might be – other Borealis patented technology finding commercial application – is a third. Being an optimist . . . well, let’s not jinx it. With 5 million shares outstanding, and selling for $2.50 a share, Borealis, with its majority stake in WheelTug and all the rest (even the iron ore!), is currently valued at $12.5 million. Thus, BOREF still strikes me as a remarkable lottery ticket. Still, even an optimist sees a 50% chance we’ll lose everything. So don’t even think of buying it with money you can’t truly afford to lose. (And if you do buy a few shares, you absolutely must place a “limit” order. It’s so thinly traded that a “market” order to buy 2,000 shares could double the price.) Full disclosure for anyone new to this column: I have a comically large position in these shares. THE POWER OF THE PRESIDENCY . . . . . . is limited, as we all know. This piece in Salon elaborates. Knowing this, liberals like me should continue to offer criticism and suggestions . . . but also our support. WHAT IF IT HAD BEEN HILLARY? Jonathan Capehart applauds Rebecca Traister’s Sunday New York Times Magazine piece, which includes this nugget: . . . Alternate-universe President Hillary Clinton would have been competing with a dream. But in a funny way, Obama is, too. We forget, sometimes, that our government was designed to limit the powers of the president. Barack Obama walked into the White House in January 2009 with his own set of structural and strategic challenges: an economy in free fall; a 24-hour cable-news and talk-radio-fed culture eager to blare “crisis!” headlines every 12 minutes, making long-view evaluations of a presidency impossible; and most important, an obstinate Congress. On every major vote, from the stimulus to uncompromised health care reform, Obama needed 60 (not the historically customary 50) to get anything moving, a practical impossibility, thanks both to Republicans, whose stated goal was not to fix things but to keep the president from fixing anything, and to conservative Democrats, who made the party’s majority a false promise to begin with. . . . ☞ The truth is, anyone who “believes in” science . . . who believes the Clinton economy (which taxed the rich) was better than what has followed (despite the massive incentives to “the job creators”) . . . who believes we need to put the unemployed to work rebuilding our infrastructure and moving toward energy independence . . . who always thought it was shameful to be the only industrialized country to lack universal health care . . . who thinks women are equal to men and LGBT Americans should enjoy equal rights — any such person, it seems to me, should feel pretty good about all that President Obama has managed to do so far; and part ways with today’s Republicans, so intransigent they will not even allow Exxon’s tax subsidies to die.
Class Warfare August 19, 2011March 24, 2017 I don’t watch as much Fox as I should. Seeing these two Jon Stewart class warfare clips from last night – the first on Warren Buffett’s plan to tax the rich, the second on the right’s plan to tax the poor – was really a little depressing, even for a guy with the happy gene. These Fox guys really are bullies. Screw the meek! If they can’t raise a family of four on $20,000 a year and pay more tax, they should just get rich and pay 15% on their dividends and capital gains. Yes, that 15% is down from the 28% they paid under Ronald Reagan – second greatest man ever to walk the earth – but still too high. They’re job creators! Exhibit A: all the jobs created since the tax rates were cut. I know I sure wouldn’t try to get rich if I knew I’d have to fork over a Reagan-era or a Clinton-era share of my riches to this thing we should all want to diminish (the United States government). At those rates, what would be my motivation? Watch the clips. Wow.
The Answer Is So Obvious August 18, 2011March 24, 2017 Your thoughts on yesterday tomorrow, but today . . . INFRASTRUCTURE! In small part, by Dave Johnson for the Campaign for America’s Future: . . . Put millions of people to work repairing and rebuilding our public infrastructure—now. Do it while the nation has an abundance of idle skilled labor, unused construction and manufacturing capacity, and record low borrowing costs. Ignore the deficit-mongers. This is essential for addressing today’s jobs crisis and tomorrow’s economic growth needs. Plus, investing in infrastructure costs less than the cost of high levels of unemployment: the lower tax revenues, loss of business activity, and all of the forms of government spending resulting from slow growth and increased joblessness. . . . . . . Interviewed for a 60 Minutes 2010 story about Brazil’s economic success—including a 7 percent unemployment rate and 7.5 percent economic growth in 2010—Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva said, “I have found out something amazing: the success of an elected official is in the art of doing what is obvious. It is what everyone knows needs to be done but some [in America, they are called Republicans – A.T.] insist on [not] doing.” HOW WE WIN Rick: “After reading your Warren Buffett excerpt Tuesday, I posted the link to his article on my Facebook wall. A very conservative friend messaged me later: ‘I threw up a little when I saw that you and my outspoken, communist, atheist, 59 your old cousin up in Madison, Wisconsin, both posted the same link. I was surprised how in agreement I am with what it said. Makes sense…but how…on earth…am I…in agreement…about something…like this…with MY COUSIN?!??’ I went on to explain to her that common sense transcends politics and religion and in fact, has very little to do with either. Another set of eyes opened!” ☞ Music to ears. MICHELE BACHMANN . . . . . . is not going to be the Republican nominee. So there’s no particular need to watch this Anderson Cooper clip. But it’s sure fun. NABI/TTNP Guru: “NABI announced they received the $5 million we expected this month. That places current cash/share firmly at $2.50 versus last night’s price of $1.73. I expect the board will look to merge NABI with a company with a pipeline. Meanwhile, TTNP released additional data. The Phase III hit on everything: reduced opiate-positive urines (the gold standard for approval), clinician assessment (what the doctor thinks), global severity of opioid dependence, overall patient improvement. Compared to oral Suboxone – the current gold standard – TTNP’s product was numerically superior, but statistically equivalent. In most cases, the side effects of TTNP’s product were numerically less than for Suboxone and often the same as placebo. The data simply could not be better! The TTNP lead investigator from St. Luke’s Roosevelt Hospital in New York said that by the end of the trial patients were beating down the door to get access. He said doctors will adopt this product because it gives them a medical procedure to do and then lets them focus on the psychological aspects of addiction rather than the medical ones. They will be able to treat more patients. The only negative is the TTNP will probably have to raise money before the end of the year. I still think they could find a buyer for the company.”
Valley Forge August 17, 2011March 24, 2017 The country’s in a bind – I think we can agree on that much. So what are WE called on to do? (“Ask NOT . . .”) How most effectively to focus our frustration? We’re not called on to spend a shoeless winter at Valley Forge, but we are, I think, called on to do this much: TO BE RIGOROUS IN OUR THINKING AND THEN ACT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF OUR COUNTRY. Don’t hate me for saying this, but I think the 97,488 idealistic Floridians who voted for Nader in 2000 (to take the most glaring example) failed that test. Their intentions could not possibly have been better, but – because they surely knew Nader could not win and Gore came closer to their ideal than Bush – they should have acted rationally and voted for Gore . . . even as they urged friends in NON-swing states to vote for Nader to make their point. Imagine how different the world would be if they had. Today, I have mainly two kinds of friends: (1) Those who feel pride in all the President has accomplished and focus their angst on the opposition that has kept him from accomplishing more. (2) Those who believe that if only he were smarter, or cared more, or worked harder – or were tougher – he COULD have accomplished so much more. I am passionately in the first camp, but for the sake of argument, let’s stipulate that my friends in the second camp are right. What should they do? Yes, they agree a McCain/Palin presidency would have been unthinkably worse. And, yes, they agree even a so-called “moderate” Republican would be all about appeasing the religious right with his judicial appointments – the last straw for a Court already tilted against us – and all about pledging never to raise taxes on anything, ever. Yet my friends in this second camp are just so angry – with good reason but, I think, at the wrong people – that they say they will VOTE for Obama but won’t do more than that. So here’s the rigorous thinking part: You either want a huge turn-out that reelects the President (and holds the Senate, takes back the House, and flips state legislatures back from red to blue) – or you don’t. (Some of you don’t. You think Bush took the country in the right direction; you think historic low taxes on the rich these last 10 years produced tremendous job creation; you don’t “believe in” evolution or man-made climate change; you think women should be submissive and gays denied equal rights; you like the gun show loophole – whatever. You are not alone!) But if you do want a huge turn-out that reelects the President (and holds the Senate, etc.), then it’s nuts to withhold the resources – and enthusiasm – needed to produce that outcome. That only helps the OTHER side and risks an outcome we would regret for the rest of our lives – as many of us will regret Bush v. Gore. I’m not proposing we become mindless cheerleaders or stop voicing our frustration and offering our suggestions — forcefully. But the bottom line, if we really do want to win, is that we need to pump each other up, not demoralize each other. The challenge of 2012 is significant – not least because in 27 states Republicans are doing their damnedest to make it hard to vote. (And they call us unAmerican?) But here’s the good news: ☞ If we ARE rigorous in our thinking we WILL win. ☞ For all the obstacles, this Administration averted a depression, restored America’s standing in the world, launched an educational “race to the top,” doubled auto efficiency standards, killed Bin Laden, appointed two progressive Justices, extended health insurance to 30 million people, preserved the social safety net . . . and on and on and on. It’s a VERY long list. ☞ And for all the frustration, people ARE stepping up – in record numbers – to fund OBAMA VICTORY FUND 2012, and giving at record levels. If that’s you – thanks. If not, I’d ask you to sandwich your disappointment between these two frames – and to do so whenever the subject arises, as it always does. The first frame: We need to win! The world depends on it! The second frame: the REASON we didn’t get the public option or raise taxes on billionaire hedge fund managers or [name your top frustration] is that the Republicans stood in the way. It would be a tragedy to let the other side win as they did in 2000. Success requires resources and a willingness to express enthusiasm. Which isn’t always easy – but neither was Valley Forge. In case you agree, please help spread the word.
Tzedakah August 16, 2011March 24, 2017 WARREN BUFFET’S ANALYSIS Here, in case you missed it in the New York Times. In small part: Stop Coddling the Super-Rich By WARREN E. BUFFETT Published: August 14, 2011 . . . The mega-rich pay income taxes at a rate of 15 percent on most of their earnings but pay practically nothing in payroll taxes. It’s a different story for the middle class: typically, they fall into the 15 percent and 25 percent income tax brackets, and then are hit with heavy payroll taxes to boot. Back in the 1980s and 1990s, tax rates for the rich were far higher, and my percentage rate was in the middle of the pack. According to a theory I sometimes hear, I should have thrown a fit and refused to invest because of the elevated tax rates on capital gains and dividends. I didn’t refuse, nor did others. I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone — not even when capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 — shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain. People invest to make money, and potential taxes have never scared them off. And to those who argue that higher rates hurt job creation, I would note that a net of nearly 40 million jobs were added between 1980 and 2000. You know what’s happened since then: lower tax rates and far lower job creation. . . . MORAL RELATIVISM Yesterday, Dr. K urged us to eschew DNDN (which Guru thinks is going up, but whose drug he believes should not have been approved) – on moral grounds. I suggested that the amount of harm one would do by buying shares would be negligible compared to the good one could do with the profit (should there be one). Ed: “Oh dear! Using the proceeds of a morally corrupt investment to do good deeds in no way ameliorates the stain. Good ends do not justify evil means!” ☞ It’s not clear to me that it’s evil to buy these shares (or even that DNDN management is aware Provenge is useless, though Guru and Dr. K. are quite sure it is). The money you put up to buy the shares doesn’t go to the company, it goes to some seller (who could be planning to use the cash to feed starving children). In theory, of course, your adding – even infinitesimally – to demand for the stock buoys its price, so that if it needed to raise more capital (which I don’t think it does) it might get an infinitesimally better price. But infinitesimal harm strikes me as less consequential than concrete good. And there are loads of concrete good things to do with the profit from this trade, in case we make one. Abe: “As I age and think about things like mitzvahs and tzedakah, I more and more think your good Doctor K may be on to something. I am torn. I own MO (formerly Philip Morris). Bought it right after the court case where they did not have to post bond to continue an appeal. Been very good to me ever since. My basis in the stock and its subsequent spinoffs returns over 11% per year in dividends alone. Still, I don’t know. Making money from tobacco? I have justified it with, ‘Well, the funds provided have served good purpose.’ Question may be, were those purposes good enough?” ☞ I expect they were. Nothing about your ownership helped sell more cigarettes. You didn’t fund the company’s expansion – they are funded from operations. MYLGF Russell T.: “Surely I’m not the only one of your readers who bought that lottery ticket? Should I sell? Hold? Buy more?” ☞ A lottery ticket is exactly how you should regard it – but, I think, quite a good one. No need to buy more if you already have it; no way anyone should buy it except with money he or she can truly afford to lose (it is a lottery ticket!). And because it trades so thinly, if you do put in an order, be sure to place a limit. Guru writes: “They released earnings last week. Expenses have come down, including compensation expenses. They aren’t overpaying the managers at shareholder expense. They estimate they are well financed into 2014 – that will be plenty of time to see if the thesis about their drugs is correct. Lots of breathing room. The biology here is compelling!”
DNDN Again August 15, 2011March 24, 2017 I’m declaring today a holiday, but — for those of you who follow Dendreon — I turn the mike over to two of my esteemed readers, both doctors: Guru: “The reimbursement specialist I talked to (part of an oncology practice) was very bullish on Dendreon, now that they have a Q code. She said a permanent J code – for ultimate ease of reimbursement – should follow soon. She was the one who pointed out that in 2010 in her state, there were only five centers in the whole state who offered Provenge. Now there are pages and pages of them, including the three in Hollywood I mentioned yesterday. Fair or unfair, the doctors who administer this get $5800 for doing so – very profitable for them. Right or not, Medicare has decided Provenge works well and will get broad reimbursement. Right or not, many of the key opinion leaders have also decided it works. The reimbursement specialist herself was very bullish on Provenge – it harnesses your own immune system to treat cancer! She said that the Q code and the permanent J code will make reimbursement almost automatic, relieving the issue that torpedoed DNDN’s earnings in the 2Q and the guidance in 2011. They will make the guidance – and much more – but in 2012. Wall street will figure this out over the next couple of months. That’s why it is a buy now. For the record, DNDN will start another prostate cancer trial this year as well as a bladder cancer trial. No crossover. No other shenanigans with the protocols to make it look like it is working. Survival will be the end point in both trials. Both trials will take five years or longer, I estimate. Both will fail.” Kevin K: “I think there’s a moral decision to consider – when I asked my mentor why Stanford and UCSF were giving Dendreon’s vaccine to their prostate cancer patients and Johns Hopkins wasn’t, he sent a one-word answer: ‘geld.’ At a time when we are ALL concerned about Medicare’s financial solvency, should we really participate in encouraging in ANY way any urologist or oncologist wasting $100,000 of Medicare’s money on a placebo? I would urge your readers to not want to make any money on Dendreon on principle alone. I know people don’t really consider the moral implications of their investments, but I have stayed far away from Dendreon’s stock for these reasons and I hope your enlightened readers would do the same.” ☞ I love Dr. K’s motivation but don’t share his view. The amount of harm one would do by buying 300 shares – or 10,000 shares – of the stock is infinitesimal. The amount of good one could do with a $3,000 profit – or a $100,000 profit – if the stock were to double from here, is considerable.
A Brilliant Plan August 12, 2011March 24, 2017 Down 634, up 429, down 519, up 423 . . . how quickly we get sensitized to the new normal. Fear and greed on steroids. A BRILLIANT PLAN Watch this. Its premise is that we need to create jobs – and that perhaps we can. The credit downgrade and the wildly gyrating stock market may have sufficiently scared Congress into doing something. But what to do? Exhume the Republican requests for stimulus money, wherein many Republican House members argued – in writing – for projects that they claimed would improve life and create jobs in their districts . . . and approve all those requests. It sounds a little dull here, but watch. It’s delicious. SO WHERE IS CONGRESS I’ve gotten emails criticizing the President for not calling Congress back from its vacation. In his remarks at a Michigan battery factory yesterday, he responded: You know, in the aftermath of this whole debt ceiling debacle, and when the market’s going up and down as it is, there’s been a lot of talk in Washington right now that I should call Congress back early. The last thing we need is Congress spending more time arguing in D.C. (Applause.) What I figure is, they need to spend more time out here listening to you and hearing how fed up you are. (Applause.) That’s why I’m here. That’s why I’ll be traveling to a lot of communities like this one over the next week. That’s what Congress should be doing — go back home, listen to people’s frustrations with all the gridlock. Listen to how frustrated folks are with the constant bickering and the unwillingness to compromise and the desire to score points, even if it’s at the expense of our country. And if they’re listening hard enough, maybe they’ll come back to Washington ready to compromise and ready to create jobs and ready to reduce our deficit — ready to do what you sent them there to do. DNDN Remember Guru, who is certain Provenge doesn’t really work? “Actually,” he wrote me last night, “you’re going to be shocked but Dendreon is a screaming buy here. Urologists all over the country are signing up to be Provenge providers now that the Q code is in place. There are three doctors in Hollywood Florida alone who just signed up. I talked to a reimbursement specialist yesterday. There is a theoretical concern about Medicare cutbacks from the deficit panel November 23. But it won’t matter.” He still thinks it won’t work, but that doesn’t mean it won’t sell. HOW FDR WAS ALMOST KILLED BY FRIENDLY FIRE It seems a destroyer accidentally fired a live torpedo at the ship he was on. You can read it easily in Wikipedia, here; or more colorfully, with a little more effort, in Kit Bonner’s USS Iowa At War, using Amazon’s “search inside” function, here. Search on “Willie Dee” – you’ll see the remarkable tale. It begins on page 44. (Thanks, Fred.)
A Good War August 11, 2011March 24, 2017 The sun, as previously suggested, will come out tomorrow. (If not literally tomorrow.) One reminder of that was the yesterday’s news of a possible cancer cure. So, yes, maybe your 401(k) is in the toilet; but maybe you’ll get to enjoy life with your spouse or your folks or your child for an extra 20 years. (So keep contributing all you can to that retirement plan.) We still have a load of problems to work through – including Europe’s banking problems which are interconnected with our own. (In case you hadn’t noticed, the global financial system is by now, like it or not, pretty well one financial system.) Our biggest problem may be an opposition party intent on the President’s failure – which, of necessity, pretty much requires national failure, at least until the next election. If that sounds excessively partisan, remember that this is the crowd that cheered when Chicago lost its bid for the 2016 Olympics; the crowd that killed its own proposal for a bipartisan budget deficit commission once the President agreed it was a good idea (he had to establish the Bowles-Simpson Commission by executive order, instead); the crowd that wanted to let GM and Chrysler go under; the crowd that needlessly brought the nation to the brink of default, dealing a body blow to business confidence and investor confidence – and S&P’s confidence in our ability to solve our problems. Yet I have to think we will begin to solve those problems, sooner rather than later, and surely a year from November when, I hope, the House Tea Party members are thanked for their enthusiasm and good intentions but retired for their intransigence and narrow focus. INFRASTRUCTURE Stephen Gilbert: “Remember when the Mississippi River bridge collapsed in Minnesota? We cared about the infrastructure for a few weeks; there was video. And, by the way, we have been spending a fortune on infrastructure – in Iraq.” Chris Hubbard: “From a twitter post by Paul Myers (@pulmyears), making your point from yesterday: ‘The USA should invade the USA and win the hearts and mind of the population by building roads, bridges, and putting locals to work.’ ” Indeed. WE NEED A WAR Like the one that got us out of the Depression – but a war that builds things rather than blows them up. Namely, a war on our crumbling infrastructure and our dependence on foreign oil. I think the nation could rally around that war.
The Infrastructure Deficit August 10, 2011March 24, 2017 While the Tea Party focuses on the budget deficit, channeling the ghost of Herbert Hoover, the nation’s infrastructure slowly crumbles. The Urban Land Institute says: In contrast with its global competition, the United States is lurching along a problematic course—potentially losing additional ground. After more than 30 years of conspicuously underfunding infrastructure and faced with large budget deficits, increasing numbers of national and local leaders have come to recognize and discuss how to deal with evident problems. But a politically fractured government has mustered little appetite to confront the daunting challenges, which include finding an estimated $2 trillion just to rebuild deteriorating networks. Operating beyond their planned life cycles, these systems include roads, bridges, water lines, sewage treatment plants, and dams serving the nation’s primary economic centers. Brookings calls the infrastructure deficit “more than $2 trillion.” And this article (thanks for these, Jonathan!) says that to build the infrastructure we need would cost $8 trillion or more. With interest rates low and millions of talented people looking for work, wouldn’t it be a good idea to float 30-year bonds to put them to work revitalizing our infrastructure with projects that might last 100 years?