Categories
folly free trade & free markets

Hedging Our Bets

Sharing

Do congressmen know anything about anything?

Perhaps that’s an unfair question. These guys demonstrate a whole heckuva lot of savvy when it comes to logrolling, porkbarrelling, taxing, spending. Oh, and sniping, grandstanding and griping, and of failing to read bills they pass. I apologize if I implied any deficiency of proficiency in such areas.

I just wonder whether they know anything about real life outside the ways and byways of Capitol Hill.

For example, on the question of whether altering investment strategy in response to changing economic news constitutes “fraud.” If risk management equals fraud, lots of firms should close down tomorrow to protect themselves from congressional subcommittees eager to pretend that government policies have played no major part in screwing up the economy.

Power Line blogger John Hinderaker, after wading through transcripts of the senatorial interrogation of officers from Goldman Sachs, concludes that the senators, “seemingly without exception, are embarrassingly ignorant of modern risk management techniques. . . . [of] how and why firms like Goldman Sachs hedge their exposure to various economic trends . . . [They seem] to think that there was something ‘evil’ about taking a short position — that all investors were somehow required to try to keep the housing bubble going.”

Hinderaker’s observations are more detailed than I can recapitulate here. But the bottom line — that those who would run our lives don’t understand the bottom lines of those who actually work and trade for a living — is nothing new.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

9 replies on “Hedging Our Bets”

It’s not so much whether career politicians know anything about real life, as it’s that they are mentally deficient due to two factors, having political power for a long time and desiring political power. Loss of mental acuity is proportional to each of these two factors. So is a loss of moral sense.

It’s claimed that noted short sellers such as George Soros (“The Man who Broke the Bank of England” – check Wikipedia for this term; great write-up – by shorting sterling silver in the early 90s… and has done pretty much the same thing over here; the Dow took a dive when McCain had a lead in Sept ’08, whereupon McCain fell behind Obama for the rest of the election) and John Paulson (NOT Hank; this wonderful man made just short of a billion in one day by shorting Goldman Sucks, er Sachs, as did Goldman Sachs itself, if not to the tune of a billion; he made another killing by packaging crap mortgage-based assets into a “designed to fail” package that failed, while shorters cleaned up) are on Obama’s side.

Obama has 4 years, these short sellers, his “base” (no comment on this motley crew; no, this term is NOT misspelled, 80s band or not), and Wall St to destroy our economy. He’s done a spectacular job so far… just not as president.

Some say Obama is stupid, inept, or has a tin ear when it comes to politics, etc. He is nothing of the sort.

He’s doing just what he (and his minions, owners) planned to do. Note that neither Trial Balloon Holder nor No-nothing Napolitano (what a pair of morons) even bothered to read the 10-page AZ immigration bill (which was passed into Federal law in ’52 as the McCarran-Walter Immigration and Nationality Act, USC 1304, subsection e of which requires that “immigrants” – all of ’em – must carry ID on them at all times… just like all Americans who drive or have bank accounts; republican columnists seem to be keeping this a secret with the exception of Nat’l Review’s Rich Lowry, who was right on top of it early; Lowry is a good guy and can be trusted, as opposed to any member of Obama’s “cabinet,” obviously a DIY thrown-together mess) before wetting themselves in self-righteous indignation. What a pair of clueless clowns! Unconstitutional? It took right at 60 years to come to this recent conclusion?

Yes, the gov’t assumes the ignorance of American voters, which is generally a good bet. The Lamestream Media is losing money to keep the American people in the dark re DC. (Well, CBS nuze is paying Perky Katie $14 mill/year to keep them in last place, while ABC and NBC anchors make less. Her contract is about to come up for renewal. How stupid is CBS? Wait and see!) When the NY TIMES is deemed “too big to fail,” buy your pitchforks and torches early before they sell out!

I’m only surprised that O only awarded himself a B+ for his first year of his only term as prez. By his criteria, he scored an A+.

The solid dem control of both Houses of Congress is a different story. Like many republicans, they were the worst government money can buy.

RINOs such as Mitch McConnell shouldn’t be anywhere near a position of leadership. This guy is a lame squish. Sen John Cornyn has disgraced himself with his stance of “Sing Along with Mitch.” (Cornyn had been a fave of mine, but his support and encouragement of Charlie Crist – who should have run for a second term as Gov of FL, which he would have won in a walk, but was talked into running for senator by RINO leadership – brilliant, huh? – have really stunk up this guy. Ann Coulter: Republicans prefer to surrender from a position of strength.)

Okay, so you have to be a boring old phart to get that “Sing Along…” reference. Mitch Miller was a successful studio music producer who had a popular show on TV when I was a kid. But families had one TV set back then, and dads ruled.

I would add “in it for the *money* AND the power” to the post above. What’s the point of having power if you can’t get rich with it?

Presidents leaving office get a retroactive bribe from Saudi Arabia (1 to 20 mill) and others who have benefited from the actions of the prez.

Hillary Clinton has hundreds of thousands of dollars still owing on her ’08 prez run. She could pay that out of pocket change, but some people simply can’t have enough money. Wanna date with Bubba? Send ’em money! Don’t you think Hillary is deserving? (I would require clarification: “deserving” of exactly what?)

Statist politicians and their enablers are constantly talking about the need to “regulate” business. What they really want to do is control the businesses, so they can threaten them to get campaign contributions, or provide them subsidies to get campaign contributions again.

Most politicians have never built a business, but they do know that laws can affect businesses, so they use it to their advantage. Politics is about power and the use of force – and politicians are not to be trusted to “regulate” business beyond resolving conflicts among people and companies, and government organizations (do they ever side against government?).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *