jump to navigation

自作自受怪不了別人 November 3, 2018

Posted by hslu in Congress, 美國, Democracy, Election, Politics, US Government, 民主.
Tags: , , ,
add a comment

The powerful weapon House Republicans handed Democrats

http://flip.it/OklMmi

House Republicans changed the rules in 2015.

If the Democrats win back the House, they can use the unilateral subpoena authority to make Republicans days very difficult.

The midterm election is only a few days away.

Democrats aren’t much better October 13, 2018

Posted by hslu in Congress, 美國, Economics, Election, Politics, Retirement, Trump, US Government.
Tags: , , , ,
add a comment

http://flip.it/CU0Z5W

Most Americans are screwed no matter which party is in power.

Republican’s tax cuts are extremely good for the top 1%. The other 99% won’t get much. The U.S. is saddled with a bigger deficit and a accelerating national debt it has no way of paying it off.

Democrats like to tax and spend. Higher taxes reduce Americans’ take home pay. It’s bad. Bigger government spending increases deficit and national debt. It’s insane.

Yes, I agree that without doing something on the entitlements, America is screwed. Reducing welfare benefits, seniors and poor Americans are doomed. Letting welfare benefits grow like they have been in the past, the middle class will see a bigger portion of their income goes to others who can’t support themselves. The top 1% won’t feel a thing.

Either way you look, America is doomed.

No matter which party is in charge, poor Americans will be poorer.

The middle class will continue to pay.

But, the top 1% are untouchable. They’ve been laughing to the banks. They will keep donating to the Democrats and Republicans and claim tax deductions to lower their income taxes. Life is peachy for them thanks to the Democrats and Republicans.

美國政治的神聖大戰 September 23, 2018

Posted by hslu in Congress, 特朗普, 美國, Democracy, Election, Obama, Obamacare, Politics, Religion, Social Issues, Trump, US Government, 川普, 民主.
Tags: , , , , , ,
add a comment

許多人都以為美國國會參,眾兩院議員或美國總統的選舉是美國民主黨和共和黨兩黨對立,競爭最激烈,影響最深遠,最有關鍵性的政治鬥爭。

其實,這是一個錯誤的看法。美國最神聖的政治戰場不在衆議院,不在參議院,也不在白宮。它在美國的聯邦最高法院。

不錯,參議院有 100 個參議員,每隔兩年有三十幾個參議員必須參加選舉。每六年,100 個參議員就要全部參選一次。每隔兩年,眾議院所有的眾議員,435 個,全都要重選。還有,參眾兩院的議員連選得連任,可以一直做到被對手打敗,自願下台,或老死為止,沒有任位期限的限制。美國總統,則是每四年選一次,連選得連任一次。在美國的歷史上,只有在非常時期,美國總統曾經在連任後再繼續做下去的。但是,這不是慣例。

美國的國會立法,編預算,經過總統同意並簽字以後才能生效,成為國家,政府和人民遵守的法律。雖然國會議員的權力很大,但是,通常来说,參眾兩院兩黨席位的多少和兩黨的意識形態是決定法律的性質和內涵的主要因素。

一般來說,少數服從多數是衆議院的常規。席位少的那一黨經常被大黨打的七零八落,抬不起頭,根本沒有還手的餘地。民主黨當政時如此,共和黨當政的時候還不是如此。通常,兩個黨都同意的提案少之又少:那些無關緊要,雞毛蒜皮的小事,沒有人在乎的提案才能夠得到兩黨的支持。那些重要的,關乎兩黨意識形態的提案則經常是爭的你死我活,沒有妥協的餘地。不過,到最後,那一個黨的票數多,那一黨就會贏。一般來說沒有什麼意外。

參議院就不同了。第一,也是最主要的一個關卡,就是許多提案需要 60 個參議員同意,才有可能被黨領袖提出來討論。第二,任何一個參議員都可以對委員會提出的任何一個提案提出修正,可以用不同的議院會議規則來阻止一個法案的通過。其實,許多法案在提出來辯論以前,私底下不知道已經經過了多少折衝,多少取捨,多少談判,多少籠絡和多少變像的賄賂了。這是美國大衆都知道和不爭的事實。參議員雖然很有權力,不過黨的首領和總統在私底下給他一點好處,多播一些錢給他的州,參議員再公開的做做樣子,大部分都會跟隨黨的領導,乖乖的投下他那一張不太聖神的一票。

總統在公開的場合可以表現的很君子,很文明,很有理性。私底下他卻可能會很殘酷,很骯髒,很可惡,很不道德。在美國兩黨的戰爭裏,總統有他特殊的位置。他可能用他的領導力,厲害的口舌,或者不要臉的伎倆左右他的黨的意識形態。他也可以用棍子和胡蘿蔔去跟議員周旋來爭取他想要的法律。他也可以用罵街罵到你抬不起頭的伎倆使不聽話的議員屈服在他淫威下。他更可以跟流氓地痞一樣威脅議員,讓那些反對他的議員知難而退。這些政治上的謀殺都是經常在華盛頓DC上演的好戲。許多議員爲了選票,爲了能夠連任,爲了大權,爲了未來的影響力,到頭來只能默默的屈服在總統的淫威之下。

美國人只要一提到美國的民主政治,總是沾沾自喜,說美國有全世界最好的憲法,最好的民主政治體系,全名參選,每個人都有神聖的一票。國會立法,議員管錢,總統執行,權力平衡,相互牽制,依法治國,司法獨立。美國人沒事就把這些拿出來當寶一樣耍,好像這是千年奇珍,萬年異寶,從古至今難得一見的東西。

可是,當你看到歐巴馬和民主黨專政,獨裁,佔領了白宮,參議院和眾議院,通過了不可能成功的 ObamaCare,還拼命的把美國往極端左傾自由派的火坑裏推。當你看到民主黨壓制共和黨,你免不了要摸摸頭,眨眨眼,吞一口口水,想一想,然後問一問自己:“難道這就是美國的民主嗎?”如果這種近乎獨裁的政府是民主的代表,那美國標榜的權力平衡和互相牽制的民主政治在那裏呢?

歐巴馬專政八年下來,美國在世界上的地位一落千丈,美國極端右傾的白人保守派被打到體無完膚,潰不成軍。當然,他們對 Obama 和民主黨也已經到了忍無可忍的地步了。這就是為什麼 Trump 能夠在 2016 大選中當上總統,共和黨也拿下參衆兩院多數黨地位的原因。這就是我說的美國白人保守派最後的掙扎。

2017年1月Trump 上臺後,共和黨佔領了總統府和參眾兩院。不過共和黨在參議院只有52票,許多 Trump 想要通過的法案根本無法通過。一直到現在,真正通過重要的法律沒有一個:個人和公司減稅法案。

到了這個地步,如果你仍然認爲美國總統除了軍事,外交和對外貿易有主動權之外並沒什麼實權,那你就錯了。

美國的衆議員和參議員每隔兩年就有幾個舊的走,有幾個新的來。當然,有不少議員能夠連任,在位一坐幾十年的也不少。美國總統四年一換,最多可以做八年。這些議員今天通過的法律,明天新的議會和新的總統有辦法就可以改,可以變,也可以廢除。這四年,美國可以往保守派靠攏。下四年,新的法律可以把美國往自由派的懷裏推。可是,美國總統有一個特殊的權力,它對美國社會的影響比國會對社會的影響要深遠的多,要長久的多。這個權力就是聯邦法院,尤其是聯邦最高法院大法官的提名權。

美國的州立法院是美國各州的法院。它們依照美國各州訂下來的法律審理各州的訴訟事宜。與 52 個州的州立法院平行的是美國聯邦法院。聯邦法院管理的是跟聯邦有關的訴訟案件。雖然州立法院跟聯邦法院是分開的系統,但是當州的訴訟事宜跟聯邦法律有關係的時候,這這些訴訟事宜就可以繼續上訴到聯邦法院。

美國的聯邦法院有三級。所有聯邦法院的法官都是由總統提名,由參議院委員會審合,同意,然後又全部參議員投票同意後任命。所有的聯邦法官都是終身任職,也就是說他們可能在位幾十年,一直到他們決定退休爲止。

  1.   聯邦地區法院 – 一共有 94 個,分佈在美國各州。管理州立法院判決後上訴的訴訟事宜。
  2.   聯邦上訴法院 – 一共有 13 個,每個法院有十二個法官。11 個上訴法院分佈在美國各區。華盛頓特區也有一個上訴法院和一個特殊的上訴法院。聯邦上訴法院又叫巡迴上訴法院。聯邦地區法院判決後的訴訟案件,不服的可以上訴到聯邦上訴法院。
  3.   聯邦最高法院 – 位於華盛頓哥倫比亞特區,有九位大法官。巡迴上訴法院判決後不服的訴訟案件可以上訴到最高法院。

聯邦地區法院的法官是聯邦法院系統的下級初審法官。他們階級比較低,事務繁重,管的案件多。他們的前途就是希望有朝一日能夠被總統提名成爲上訴法院的法官或被總統任命爲聯邦政府司法院的律師或高級官員。

聯邦上訴法院的法官是在全國各地的上訴法院爲保守派或自由派把關,左右上訴案件判決結果的法官。進一步來說,總統提名保守派或自由派的聯邦上訴法院法官爲的是爲了培養將來最高法院大法官鋪路的。因爲,美國聯邦最高法院才是保守派和自由派之間你爭我奪,強取豪奪,拼的你死我活,最神聖的政治戰場。

美國的聯邦最高法院是美國的最後上訴法院。最高法院有九名大法官:一名首席大法官和八名大法官。最高法院從上訴法院接下來的案件都對全美國有舉足輕重的影響。這九名大法官決定的法律就是美國定讞的法律。也就是說,有關美國聯邦法律的案件,他們九個人說了算。

如果你想要對美國的聯邦最高法院有更進一步的瞭解請看下列網站:

美国聯邦法院:

https://baike.baidu.com/item/%E7%BE%8E%E5%9B%BD%E8%81%94%E9%82%A6%E6%B3%95%E9%99%A2

美国最高法院:

https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%BE%8E%E5%9B%BD%E6%9C%80%E9%AB%98%E6%B3%95%E9%99%A2

.

照道理,美國的聯邦最高法院大法官是萬中挑一的資深法官,是經過精挑細選有經驗,有地位,有名聲的法官。他們對美國的法律應該有獨到的見解,對法律的含義有精闢的認知,對以前的案子有深刻的瞭解。他們應該公正無私,正直不阿,判案時不應該有任何私心,更不應該被個人的政治傾向或意識形態影響判案的結果。美國司法制度經過兩百多年民主政治的考驗想必已經非常成熟了。你可能會相信,美國的九個最高大法官辦案時一定會排除私心,公正的依照法律的真義來判決。

可是,事實並不如此。美國聯邦最高法院才是美國政治鬥爭和意識形態肉搏戰最高,最神聖的戰場。

聯邦最高法院大法官的提名一直都是最受美國人關切和矚目的大事。一旦被提名以後,這位法官將會受到反對派智庫,名嘴和媒體無情的批評。他(她)的人格,他以前的行爲,他的著作,他判案的歷史和他對美國影響深遠子法律的看法都會被反對派挖出來仔細的研究,批判,攻擊和中傷。而贊成的那一派就會極盡其能的讚揚和吹捧他,還會儘量的去掩蓋他的短處。共和黨和民主黨在聯邦大法官聽證會上勾心鬥角,爾虞我詐,常常使出不入流的招數和方法來增加或減少大法官任命的機會。真可謂是無所不用其極。這兩黨的政治鬥爭醜惡異常,因爲被提名的大法官會不會被任命爲聯邦最高法院大法官對自由派和保守派來說實在是太重要了。

這個原因很簡單:這些最高法院大法官個人的宗教信仰,對社會和人身議題的看法和他們的政治傾向都會影響他們對案件的判斷和判決。而聯邦最高法院大法官對上訴法案的判決有決定性,是美國定讞的法律,是很難改變的。這九個聯邦最高法院大法官的判案結果影響深遠,效果長久,牽涉廣泛。這些重要的話題包括:種族,宗教,人權,歧視,墮胎,言論自由,信仰自由,計劃生育,同性戀,同性戀者的權力,死刑,槍支控制,環境保護,人身保護,州 vs 聯邦的權力,平等機會法案,總統的特權,等等。最近的幾個聯邦最高法院決定性的判決有:2000 年 Bush 贏得總統大選,2004 年恐怖分子可以被政府合法拘留,2012 年 Obamacare 的合法化和 2018 年維持 Trump 拒絕數個由穆斯林國家旅客進入美國的決定,等等。

讓我們簡單的看看最近這幾年民主黨和共和黨對美國聯邦最高法院大法官提名的鬥爭所使出的伎倆,也就是所謂的 Nuclear Option 吧:

Nuclear Option ,又稱 Constitution Option – 核子選擇或憲法選擇

長期以來,美國參議院對有爭議的議題有一個很重要的條例:需要 60 位參議員同意才能停止該議題的辯論。這個規定是爲了給所有參議員足夠的時間來討論這個重要的議題或對該議題提出修改方案。如果參議院想要修改這個條例,需要超級多數,也就是 67 位參議員同意,才能修改。

Nuclear option 是參議院的一個國會議會程序。用 Nuclear 這個字就是表示這是一個非到不得以才使用的議會程序。如果輕易使用,後果可能會不堪設想。當一個黨使用 Nuclear Option 時,那這個黨只要 51 位參議員同意,不是 67 位,就可以修改這個 ”需要 60 位參議員同意才能停止該議題辯論“的條例了。

這個議會程序一但被某一個黨使用以後,另外一個黨也可以在對該黨有利的情況下使用這個議會程序來停止一個議題的討論。簡單的說, Nuclear Option 一經使用就代表任何一個議題只要超過半數的參議員同意就可以通過了。(這是我爲這個 Nuclear Option 所做的簡單解釋。欲知詳情請自己 Google Nuclear Option。)

  • 2013 年 11 月,民主黨是參議院的多數黨。白宮也是民主黨的。Obama 上臺後依照慣例,提名白宮官員和聯邦法官人選讓參議院的司法委員會討論。司法委員會同意後,就由所有參議員投票表決。身爲反對黨,共和黨不斷的運用司法程序來延緩這些人的聽證。民主黨雖然是多數黨,可是它沒有 60 票來停止這些官員和法官在司法委員會裏面的討論,也就沒有辦法讓全部參議員來投票表決這些人的任命與否。民主黨領袖一不做二不休用了 Nuclear Option 來停止這些人員在司法委員會的討論。接下來由民主黨控制的司法委員會投票,移送參議院投票表決。因爲民主黨是多數黨,這些人的任命就輕而易舉的通過了。請注意,Nuclear Option 只能用於白宮人員和聯邦大法官任命的討論。一般的法律是不能用 Nuclear Option 的。
  • 2016 年,保守派大法官 Antonin Scalia 去逝。Obama 身爲自由派的總統,依法可以提名一位偏向自由派的法官來補 Scalia 的缺。可是當時共和黨當道,擁有參議院多數的席位。共和黨的領袖完全拒絕考慮 Obama 的提名,因爲如果 Obama 提名的自由派法官被任命爲最高法院的大法官,那保守派就幾乎沒有可能推翻他們最在意的法律了:墮胎合法化,也就是著名的 Roe vs. Wade。身爲少數黨的民主黨除了乾瞪眼之外,根本沒有辦法可施。結果,美國最高法院有好幾個月只有8個大法官。
  • 2016 年 11 月,Trump 用保守派的身份被美國的選民選爲美國第 45 任總統。他上臺沒多久就提名保守派法官 Neil Gorsuch 爲最高法官候選人。
  • 2017 年 4 月,共和黨在參衆兩院都是多數黨。共和黨控制的參議院仿照民主黨的伎倆用 Nuclear Option 來輕鬆的通過 Neil Gorsuch 爲聯邦最高法院大法官的任命。
  • Neil Gorsuch 代替突然去逝的 Antonin Saclia 並沒有引起民主黨太多的反對。他們兩人都是保守派,Gorsuch 的任命並沒有改變聯邦最高法院自由派和保守派長久以來的平衡。民主黨也就沒有太在意共和黨使用的 Nuclear Option 了。當然,民主黨可以說是自作自受,也怪不了別人。再說,他們是少數黨,也只有看着了。
  • 2018 年 7 月 31 日,聯邦最高法院大法官 Anthony Kennedy 正式退休。Kennedy 大法官在位差幾個月就 30 年。他是一個中間偏右,比較溫和的保守派大法官。他在任內,數次爲 4:4 的重要案件投下決定性的一票。對自由派來說,他最重要的決定就是維持墮胎的 (Roe vs. wade) 合法化。如今 Kennedy 退休,Trump 可以任命一個非常保守的大法官,而這個大法官的任命極有可能會推翻 Roe vs.Wade ,而讓墮胎非法化。這是民主黨和自由派絕對不能忍受的。可是,民主黨在 2013 年,因一時之快用了 Nuclear Option ,現在民主黨眼看就要爲這個決定付出幾乎無法忍受的代價了。
  • 當 Kennedy 大法官一宣佈退休,保守派的智庫就給 Trump 幾個人的名字。這些人之中,任何一個人被任命爲聯邦最高法院的大法官都有可能會推翻 Roe vs. Wade。Trump 最後選了 Kavanaugh,因爲,除了不贊成墮胎合法化以外,Kavanaugh 還認爲總統有至高無上的權力,一般的法律不能碰他。Kavanaugh 被提名以後,民主黨想盡了辦法,用年輕時性侵,酗酒,說謊來阻止 Kavanaugh 的聽證,可是有多數席位的共和黨運用 Nuclear Option 又在美國聯邦最高法院增加了一位非常保守的聯邦最高法院大法官。墮胎合法化,Roe vs. Wade,在美國的日子苦了指日可待了。

除此之外,現任自由派大法官 Ruth Bader Ginsburg 今年 85 歲。她說她不會在 Trump 任內退休。可是,如果她健康情況不允許,如果 Trump 連任,如果民主黨不能拿下參議院的多數,那自由派在意識形態的這一場聖戰就沒有翻身的機會了。還有,自由派大法官 Stephen Breyer 已經 80 歲了。你說他還能熬多久?他如果也在 Trump 任內退休,而民主黨無法拿下參議院的多數,那自由派就徹底的輸了。Roe vs. Wade 就一定會被推翻了。

我舉這些例子就是要指出美國聯邦最高法院才是保守派和自由派最重要的神聖戰場。這才是美國意識形態鬥爭的舞臺,也是民主黨和共和黨兩黨政治短兵相接,打肉搏戰的壕溝。

不要以爲美國聯邦最高法院大法官個個都公平不阿,都是司法聖人。他們才不是呢。他們判案時,把美國憲法擺在中間,把他們自己的意識形態放在左邊,然後把自己的政治傾向擺在右邊。他們判案是絕對不會只憑他們對憲法的解釋而做決定的。他們會衡量自己的意識形態,參考自己的政治傾向,然後再做他們最後的決定。

很可惜的是,這些大法官的決定通常會增加美國社會的分裂,加深自由派和保守派的鬥爭,凸顯美國共和黨和民主黨的決裂和長期影響美國人民的生活與選擇。不可謂不重要啊。

.

如果你想要更進一步,更深刻的瞭解美國聯邦最高法院大法官的提名和過去的歷史,請看:

「性侵未遂疑雲」之外,美國大法官任命的「真正戰場」與關鍵原因

2018/10/03侯智元

https://crossing.cw.com.tw/blogTopic.action?id=526&nid=10709

.

話說到這裏,我對此話題膚淺的分析只不過是一個開始,對 Kavanaugh 這個最高法院大法官的判斷恐怕也只是隨便說說而已,也不能當真。不過,這個戰場的戰事還沒有結束。接下來,美國這個最神聖的戰場還有許多仗要打呢。
Kavanaugh 雖然已經被任命爲最高法院的大法官,這恐怕不是這件事的完結篇。如果期中選舉以後,民主黨拿下衆議院的多數,那他們一定會把 Kavanaugh 聽證的諸多疑點和 FBI 對 Kavanaugh 的調查拿出來做文章。如果民主黨又拿下了參議院的多數,那 Kavanaugh 的最高法院大法官的身份恐怕也有會有一點問題。Trump 會不會被彈劾,Trump 會不會連任,Ginsburg 和 Breyer 這兩個大法官能不能支持到下一個自由派的總統進入白宮,都是無法判斷的變數。
不過,我可以大言不慚的斷言,好戲才剛剛開始,大家就拭目以待吧。

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Young Americans and Republicans “Eat what they sowed” December 8, 2013

Posted by hslu in China.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
add a comment

 

 

 

You already knew what’s going on with Obamacare, the software.

It’s a mess.

 

You already knew what’s going on with Obamacare, the policy.

The worst is yet to come.

You already knew how Obamacare makes people losing their full time jobs.

You already knew that Obamacare drags down the US economy.

And, finally you already knew that Obama was forced to admit that he had lied.

Yet, Obama is still in the White House and Obamacare is still the law of the land. 

If you voted for the liar and have to pay for your mistakes by way of higher insurance premium and fewer work hours, you have no one but yourselves to blame.

We call this: “自食其果.” “Eat what they sowed.”

The others got the shaft because of a failed political system: Democracy. Obama, Pelosi, Reid and Democrats worked hard for their party. They were supposed to look after the benefits of the majority of the American people. They didn’t when they have the White House, the Senate and the House.

They blatantly abused their power to benefit their own party.

This is wrong and this is the inherent flaw of this failing political system.

Republicans have no one else to blame but themselves too. Chief Justice Roberts defected to the Democrat Party. As a result, the Republican Party lost everything. With overwhelming majority of Latinos voting for Democrats, the Republican Party will be marginalized for years if not decades.

We call this  自食其果” for the Republican Party as well.

Democracy, like human nature, is fundamentally flawed and the flaws are showing up in many democratic countries in the world.

In the long run, democracy equals socialism and is doomed to fail.

Slide4Slide3Slide2Slide1

October 16, 2013 – Point of No Return October 16, 2013

Posted by hslu in Congress, Economics, Energy, Global Affair, Health Insurance, Military, Obamacare, Oil, Politics, Taxes.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
add a comment

The war against big government in the United States was lost today. Conservatives are defeated. They are out-numbered. America will collectively pick up its steps toward a big and socialist government for decades to come. Obamacare will be even more difficult to repeal, Democrats will rule the Congress and national debt will pile up year after year until the entire nation is crushed under its weight with no means to ever pay for it.

The fundamental problem is this:

Democrats are like Santa Claus; they pass out free gifts to Americans every month of every year. The majority of Americans like handouts and they will keep Democrats in power. They do not care whether the nation can afford it or not. Everyone wants to have a piece of the pie and they will leave someone else to pay for it.

The surge of shale oil and shale gas productions will delay the day of reckoning because the way America goes about it is like someone is spending his or her inheritance money. The domestic productions will reduce trade deficits, stimulate the economy and help with taxes. Once the inheritance money starts to run out in 10 to 15 years as shale oil productions peak, the rapid build up of national debt will continue and the United States will forever pay a larger share of its taxes to service the debt.

If the status of the reserve currency of the green back is in doubt, which will come someday as other nations lost confidence in US’s ability to pay back its debt, the death knell will sound and the empire will fade away along with its 10 air carriers floating in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.

The drama has begun. It can not be stopped. It has reached to the point of no return.

The date is October 16, 2013. This is the day the Conservatives are marginalized.

Obama and big government win.

 

Krugman is at it again. January 21, 2011

Posted by hslu in China, Economics, Global Affair, jobs, Nursing, Politics.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
1 comment so far

Paul Krugman has been saying the same thing about the Renminbi for a long time. A bad economic theory from Krugman’s mouth can sound like true after he tirelessly say it a thousand times.If you ask 11 economists for their opinions, you get 12 answers. Krugman’s rant is the 12th answer here.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/21/opinion/21krugman.html?_r=1&emc=tnt&tntemail1=y
I am not sure that a stronger Renminbi is good for the US unemployment picture. The US may get a few thousand jobs here and there in the exporting industries but everyone in the US will pay more at Wal-Mart for goods coming from China. Is that good for the US economy? I am not so sure.
As of now, there is no other country in the world can replace China’s manufacture capacities. No one. In 10 years maybe. But not now.
No other country has the infrastructure to produce the amount of goods that China is exporting to the rest of the world now. If the US wants to blame someone, I am telling you that it was all Bill Clinton’s fault. His pro-Chinese policy triggered a tsunami of foreign direct investments rushing into China to build plants after plants. These American companies did it not because they don’t like American union workers. It was because they liked the Chinese worker much more. They don’t take 10 days of sick leaves a year. They don’t take 30 minute coffee breaks once every a few hours. They don’t read newspapers on company time. They don’t ask for double digit raises every few years. They don’t have fat pensions. They don’t have unsustainable health insurance benefits. They don’t come late and they don’t leave early. And they got paid at 1/5 or even 1/10 of the union wage doing similar work.
Who is the guilty party here? Americans, look into the mirror. That’s who. I haven’t mention that all these Amercian companies wnat to sell something to all these Chinese workers too.
The US promotes free trade. This is free trade. Live with it, Krugman.
The US has no one to blame but itself. Krugman, wake up and face the reality. It is not Renminbi problem. the problem lies with the costs of American workers. It is structural. It is system wide. There is no use to blame the Chinese currency. The America’s workers are not as competitive as you might believe. Period.
Hmm, did I mention other American problems such as QE2, The TARP, the first Obama stimulus and second smaller stimulus disguised as pay roll tax relief? The world will face a bigger inflation problem thanks to the Fed and US Congress. Is that what the world needs? Krugman?
So, shut up! Krugman!
Don’t talk up the Renminbi to hide the real problem of the United States. You can’t use a stronger Renminbi to compensate for a less competitive American worker force. If it ain’t so, the American companies will not move their capitals to China. They would more than happy to stay in the US. No one put a gun to the heads of these companies’ CEOs. They did it willingly. They did it with the support of their board members.

China is looking after its own interest just like the US does. What Krugman is not aware of or his sheer inability to think clearly is that China is not a pure capitalism country. The central government in China can direct significant power to where the problem is  that no US agency or Obama can match its effectiveness.What Chinese government is doing now is take a moderate, step-wise approach just like Chinese have been doing for hundreds of years.
What didn’t work in the Nixon era may be the right medicine in China if it is done judicially. Everyone predicted a 6+% inflation rate in December for China. It came in at 4.8%. Did you check your numbers, Krugman?
If the Chinese government wanted to, their actions can be swift and focused. As for the US, they have to weigh the pros and cons of every policy and each one of these policies is subject to attacks whether the government like it or not. As a Democracy, by default, many policies are moderate in nature at best because special interest groups will make sure it is so.
Except the ObamaCare which Democrats got it done behind closed doors, lie to the public, phony math and illegal bribes using public money. Well, that a topic for another day.


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/21/opinion/21krugman.html?_r=1&emc=tnt&tntemail1=y

Obama Lies. Politicians lie. December 10, 2010

Posted by hslu in Economics, Health Insurance, jobs, Obama, Politics.
Tags: , , , ,
add a comment

Almost all politician, either in the US, Taiwan, and other countries, lie. They lie when it is beneficial for them to walk away from their promises.

Obama isn’t any different.

Democrats loath to give wealthy Americans tax break of any sort. Using Obama’s definition, those making more than $250,000 in a family are wealth and they do not deserve any tax break under the Bush tax cut.


/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:””;
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}

Many times during his campaign and since he took the office, Obama has repeatedly said that wealthy Americans should not get any tax break. More recently in his September 8, 2010 speech in Cleveland, he said:

“we should not hold middle class tax cuts hostage any longer.  We are ready, this week, to give tax cuts to every American making $250,000 or less.  For any income over this amount, the tax rates would go back to what they were under President Clinton.”

And the reason for the tax increase is :

“This isn’t to punish folks who are better off – it’s because we can’t afford the $700 billion price tag.” (It is a punishment to the better-off. Period.)

Again on September 20, 2010, he said this:

“Here’s what I can’t do: I can’t give tax cuts to the top 2 percent of Americans.”

Well, he lied.He lied because he is moving toward the center of the political spectrum. He lied because he is planning for his re-election in 2012. He lied because he thought Democrat is too weak to oppose him. He lied because he thought pelosi and Reid are in his pocket.

Well, he may be in for a long fight with Democrats while Republicans are watching with glee on the sideline.

In the same September 8, 2010 speech in Cleveland, he also said these:

“I have a different vision for the future.  I’ve never believed that government has all the answers to our problems (But the federal government is getting bigger and bigger by the day).  I’ve never believed that government’s role is to create jobs or prosperity (Is he kidding or is he an idiot?).  I believe it’s the drive and ingenuity of our entrepreneurs, the skill and dedication of our workers, that has made us the wealthiest nation on Earth (But it doesn’t mean that we’ll not tax you every which way we can).  I believe it’s the private sector that must be the main engine of our recovery (Hmm, what about those shovel ready jobs he has promised?).”

“I believe government should be lean (But we’ll keep sending out unemployment checks up to 99 weeks) , it should be efficient (But we’ll add 2000 more IRS agents to keep and eye on American people,) and it should leave people free to make the choices they think are best for themselves and their families (But we’ll have government run health care for everyone), so long as those choices don’t hurt others (Politicians talk like this all the time to give them an escape clause).

Now, you see how politicians such as Obama talk from both sides of their mouths.

And the worst part of all these is that they are not held accountable for their lies and broken promises, especially those liberals because the main street media is on their sides.

I have a different vision for the future.  I’ve never believed that government has all the answers to our problems.  I’ve never believed that government’s role is to create jobs or prosperity.  I believe it’s the drive and ingenuity of our entrepreneurs, the skill and dedication of our workers, that has made us the wealthiest nation on Earth.  I believe it’s the private sector that must be the main engine of our recovery.

I believe government should be lean, it should be efficient, and it should leave people free to make the choices they think are best for themselves and their families, so long as those choices don’t hurt others.

I have a different vision for the future.  I’ve never believed that government has all the answers to our problems.  I’ve never believed that government’s role is to create jobs or prosperity.  I believe it’s the drive and ingenuity of our entrepreneurs, the skill and dedication of our workers, that has made us the wealthiest nation on Earth.  I believe it’s the private sector that must be the main engine of our recovery.

I believe government should be lean, it should be efficient, and it should leave people free to make the choices they think are best for themselves and their families, so long as those choices don’t hurt others.

I have a different vision for the future.  I’ve never believed that government has all the answers to our problems.  I’ve never believed that government’s role is to create jobs or prosperity.  I believe it’s the drive and ingenuity of our entrepreneurs, the skill and dedication of our workers, that has made us the wealthiest nation on Earth.  I believe it’s the private sector that must be the main engine of our recovery.

I believe government should be lean, it should be efficient, and it should leave people free to make the choices they think are best for themselves and their families, so long as those choices don’t hurt others.
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:””;
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}

I have a different vision for the future.  I’ve never believed that government has all the answers to our problems.  I’ve never believed that government’s role is to create jobs or prosperity.  I believe it’s the drive and ingenuity of our entrepreneurs, the skill and dedication of our workers, that has made us the wealthiest nation on Earth.  I believe it’s the private sector that must be the main engine of our recovery.

I believe government should be lean, it should be efficient, and it should leave people free to make the choices they think are best for themselves and their families, so long as those choices don’t hurt others.


/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:””;
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
I have a different vision for the future.  I’ve never believed that government has all the answers to our problems.  I’ve never believed that government’s role is to create jobs or prosperity.  I believe it’s the drive and ingenuity of our entrepreneurs, the skill and dedication of our workers, that has made us the wealthiest nation on Earth.  I believe it’s the private sector that must be the main engine of our recovery.

I believe government should be lean, it should be efficient, and it should leave people free to make the choices they think are best for themselves and their families, so long as those choices don’t hurt others.

I have a different vision for the future.  I’ve never believed that government has all the answers to our problems.  I’ve never believed that government’s role is to create jobs or prosperity.  I believe it’s the drive and ingenuity of our entrepreneurs, the skill and dedication of our workers, that has made us the wealthiest nation on Earth.  I believe it’s the private sector that must be the main engine of our recovery.

I believe government should be lean, it should be efficient, and it should leave people free to make the choices they think are best for themselves and their families, so long as those choices don’t hurt others.

Obama moves to the Center December 7, 2010

Posted by hslu in Economics, Obama, Politics.
Tags: , , , , , , ,
1 comment so far

Just like Clinton moving to the center after 1994 Democrat defeat, Obama is doing the same by agreeing with Republicans on extending Bush tax cut for 2 more years and handing out payroll tax cut and social security holidays.

Also in the deal was extending unemployment benefit for 13 more months.

Who wins?

Will economy recover because a massive tax increase is avoided?

Will the American people come out ahead of this deal because they get to keep more of their money?

Do Democrats win because people with no jobs will receive 13 more months of unemployment checks?

Do Republicans win because they get 2 years of extension on Bush tax cut for all income earners and tax breaks?

I think Obama will be the winner out of this deal even if the bill didn’t pass the way it is. Obama will be able to claim credit two years from now if economy recovers. He will be able to brag that he has American people in mind when he campaign for re-election in 2012.

To hell with the Democrats, he has already claimed credit already.

Democrats will make all kind of noise but they are the losers in this deal.

 

Obama Justice for His Muslim Brothers November 19, 2010

Posted by hslu in Do you know?, Global Affair, Islam, Military, Obama, Politics, Religion.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
add a comment

Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani:

  • A Muslim
  • An explosives expert
  • An Osama bin Laden bodyguard.
  • Knew some of the 9-11 Muslim hijackers.
  • A member of the al-Qaeda terrorist organization
  • Had been officially classified as an “enemy combatant”
  • Involved in the 1998 US embassy bombings that killed 224 people and left thousands wounded.

Trial in Civil Court instead of Military Tribunal

  • Not a US citizen.
  • Not a New York resident.
  • Obama treated his Muslim brother like a US citizen.
  • Transferred to NY to face a jury trial in a civilian court.
  • Said that he was exploited by al-Qaeda operativesand he’s sorry.
  • 1st Guantanamo detainee facing civilian trial instead of military tribunal.
  • Obama and his AG Eric Holder did not wish to seek death penalty even though 11 people were murdered.
  • Eric Holder bought 284 charges against Ghailan hoping a smooth trial and conviction of all charges serve as a model for the civilian trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of 9-11 attack.

His Denfense

  • He was tortured by CIA; an outrageous government misconduct
  • He was innocent at the time of the attacks
  • He was an immature, trusting, naïve “creature of his surroundings” who enjoyed watching cartoons
  • He had been duped by a group of men who turned out to be part of the East Africa terrorism cell.

The Verdict

  • Guilty of one count of conspiracy to destroy US government buildings and property.
  • Not guild of four counts of conspiracy, including conspiring to kill Americans and to use weapons of mass destruction.
  • Not guilty of all murder charges.

Obama is cheering

Obama and eric Holder claimed victory because Ghailani was convicted of one count which may keep him in jail for 20 years.

Questions:

  • How can liberals and Democrats got away from stupidities like this?
  • Do liberals and democrats not have brains?
  • Was it a favor to Obama’s Muslim brothers?
  • Do you know that the charges was almost dismissed by the judge on the grounds that Ghailani’s long extrajudicial detention denied him the constitution right to a speedy trial?
  • Hmm, when did foreign combatants have constitution right?

 

What can the Fed do? Not much! August 11, 2010

Posted by hslu in Economics, Obama, Politics, stocks.
Tags: , , , , , , ,
add a comment

After sleeping on Bernanke’s comment over night, the stock market tanked today.

People  on Wall Street and main streets asked “What can Bernanke do? ”

I think “Not much.”

He has bought $1.2 trillion of MBS and $300 billion government debt but people are not rushing back to the housing market to take advantages of 50-year low interest rates. People who wanted to buy a house have already done so and took $8,000 to the bank thanks to Obama. People who wanted to buy a car has already traded in their old ones and drove their new car to deposit the $4,000 government check to their banks. Short term interest rate is not too far from 0% and long tern rates are making new lows almost every day.

Obama has kept part of his stimulus money for 2012 in time for his re-election while letting the economy suffer. In the mean time, Obama and the Democrats have borrowed money from our children and grand children to keep the unemployment checks going to the jobless without cutting government spending. It appears to me that jobless rate is fixing to go up in the next couple of months because

  • China slowing down
  • Euro zone in tightening mode
  • Housing market continues to suffer despite low interest rates and,
  • US consumers have turned to savers

Since Obama hasn’t rested except taking a few vacations here and there, the revival of the US economy is rested completely on Bernanke’s shoulders.

But, it pains me to remind you that Bernanke has run out of silver bullets.

%d bloggers like this: