India-Pakistan border-closing ceremony

by Rossputin | 9:20 am, April 17, 2010

I realize it might be a bit disrespectul to find this so funny…but I do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZ0ue-XGl9c

The timing of fraud charges against Goldman Sachs

by Rossputin | 9:18 am, April 17, 2010

[Update: The WSJ note that, intentionally or otherwise, the Goldman charges served to bury the larger story of the SEC’s utter failure to stop Alan Stanford’s multi-year multi-billion-dollar fraud.]

On Friday, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed fraud charges against Goldman Sachs, not-so-affectionately known by those of us who object to a private firm essentially running our nation’s fiscal policy as Government Sachs.

[Don’t forget…it was a Goldman-dominated Treasury which repaid AIG 100 cents on the dollar for contracts whose fair market value was probably about 30 cents on the dollar, thus allowing AIG to funnel $13 billion to Goldman.  In other words, Goldman was the recipient of $10 billion stolen from taxpayers.  In most places, receipt of stolen property is a crime, but not at the US Treasury.]

The charges against Goldman basically go like this:

A big hedge fund manager named John Paulson wanted to bet against the housing market in 2008.  Paulson asked Goldman to create a type of bond portfolio containing housing-related bonds but Paulson’s intent…apparently known by Goldman at the time…was to short the bonds, i.e. bet on their going down, not up, rather than buy them.

Goldman got a nominally independent company involved in selecting which bonds would be in the portfolio but convinced the company to allow Paulson to help with that selection; Paulson indicated to the company that he would be a buyer of the bonds and therefore that his interests and the selection company’s interests were in line.  But it was a lie and Paulson chose bonds that he thought were vulnerable to collapse.  Paulson was right, of course, and shorting these bonds along with others he made betting against housing helped him make several billion dollars in the past few years. (Paulson is not related to former Goldman CEO & Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson.)

[A quick lesson on “shorting":  Shorting is a way to make a profit by the decline in price of a trade-able asset.  Let’s say a trader thinks stock XYZ will decline in price. (It doesn’t have to be a stock.  It could be any asset where this same process is possible.) The trader borrows some XYZ from someone who owns it, usually paying the lender a small fee.  The trader sells XYZ in the market, let’s say for $20/share. Let’s imagine a trader who did this with 1,000 shares of stock, he he now deposits $20,000 in his account, but he owes the stock lender the shares.  Then XYZ drops to $19/share.  The trader buys 1000 shares for $19,000, returns the shares to the lender, and keeps the $1,000 in profit (less commissions).  The fee to the lender and the interest earned on the $20,000 also play into the equation but those numbers are usually small compared to the profit or loss due to the movement in the stock price.]

As that lesson makes clear, for someone to “go short”, someone else needs to own the asset in question so it can be borrowed, and someone else must be around to buy the asset from the short seller.  So, the charge against Goldman is essentially that they sold bonds to investors which they knew or should have known were designed to fail.

On first glance, the SEC’s case appears fairly strong although how bad the behavior really was may be overstated. Jim Cramer doesn’t think the case is strong. (Cramer worked at Goldman, so might not be completely objective.) [UPDATE: The Wall Street Journal suggests the case against Goldman is weak and also that the most interesting thing about the past couple of years is “how little villainy was found."] But such cases usually do appear strong on first glance.  Most likely, Goldman will end up settling and repaying some money to investors who lost in those bonds.  It will be interesting to see how they arrive at a compensation amount because such an enormous percentage of mortgage securities lost much or most of their value.  In other words, even a non-fraudulently created bond would probably have been a substantial loser for those investors.

Interestingly, Goldman said that they lost $90 million on the transaction.  If they bought the bonds themselves, it’s a decent defense for them.  However, it’s very easy to buy one thing and hedge somewhere else so that the combination was profitable.  And that hedge will be extremely difficult for the SEC to find within the complex maze of Goldman’s total portfolio.

Is it any coincidence that the SEC charges were filed just as Democrats are trying to get even one Republican to vote for their hyper-partisan and poorly-conceived financial reform bill?  It’s a measure which retains the worst features of “too big to fail” despite the rhetoric to the contrary. It punishes big firms just for being big.  And it seems to give government the authority to break up a big firm just on a hunch that the firm might pose “systemic risk”.  (It should be noted that the failure of Lehman Brothers, a firm which many might have thought to pose such risk, was handled with barely a hiccup by the markets.)  All in all, the bill seems to allow or even encourage government to play favorites among banks, precisely what we don’t need after seeing how government pressure on banks (to make loans to less-than-creditworthy borrowers) was the single biggest cause of the financial meltdown.

Is the SEC acting as part of the Obama propaganda machine, bringing fraud charges against a major firm as part of a strategy to get public support for their “reform” bill?  I wouldn’t put it past anyone who works for this government to behave in that manner and for that reason, especially if the SEC is feeling threatened by their utter failure in the Madoff, Petters, and Stanford cases.  Could someone at the SEC be trying to curry favor with Obama and congressional Democrats with the timing of these charges?  I’d like to think the answer is “no”…but I think the answer is “yes”.

Particularly now, there is no such thing as a coincidence inside the Beltway.

Goldman is probably guilty of these charges – or at least guilty of very shoddy business practices and oversight – and heaven knows that many people including myself would like to see them taken off their pedestal…not because I oppose success but because I oppose the way the firm uses government to direct our money into their bank accounts.

But if the timing of these charges is not coincidental with the Democrats’ push to add more government control of the financial industry, then the SEC’s actions should be an even bigger scandal than Goldman’s.

Rasmussen poll: Scott McInnis 48%, John Hickenlooper 42%; ‘race still up for grabs’

by Donald E. L. Johnson | 8:15 am, April 17, 2010

Republican gubernatorial candidate Scott McInnis leads Democrat John Hickenlooper 48% to 42%, and the race still is up for grabs, according to Rasmussen Reports. Impact graphs:

Update 4: Hatred, Violent Rhetoric, and Racism at the Denver Tax Day Tea Party…

by T.L. James | 10:37 pm, April 16, 2010

…counterprotest. A few examples of the ugliness from the left/”Progressive” demo across the street from the Denver Tax Day Tea Party.

More anti-teaparty folks looking like idiots

by Mr. Bob | 3:47 pm, April 16, 2010

#tcot #teaparty #racist …this is so much fun

Taxes are the lowest they’ve been in years and no one is raising taxes right now..must see vid

by Mr. Bob | 3:29 pm, April 16, 2010

#taxes #teaparty #obamadroid
This guy never had a clue.

MSM race baiting slammed

by Mr. Bob | 3:19 pm, April 16, 2010

#teaparty #racebaiting #tcot #naacp #racepolitics

CU Gun Ban overturned by Colorado Court of Appeals; next stop Colorado Supreme Court?

by CTBC Director | 3:03 pm, April 16, 2010

Clear The Bench Colorado has tracked the threat posed by the Colorado Supreme Court to our constitutional right to keep and bear arms in Colorado for some time (including attempts to levy what amounts to an unconstitutional poll tax on firearms sales and permits, and of course the CU Regents ban on responsible and licensed concealed-carry and [...]

Tax Day Tea Party: Denver 2010

by Ari Armstrong | 12:08 pm, April 16, 2010

What do the Tea Partiers believe? Many politicians and commentators have pretended to know. I figured I’d just ask them. This first video features numerous interviews with participants of the Tax Day Tea Party, held at the state Capitol in Denver on Ap…

**Update 2: Full archive video of Denver Tea Party posted; Denver Tea Party | PPC-SPAN Livestreaming Coverage

by elpresidente | 11:11 am, April 16, 2010

**Update 7–Entire Denver Tax Day Tea Party video now posted! (video/photos after the break to speed up loading time)

Why is America down on Obama while Washington, DC insiders are so gullible?

by Donald E. L. Johnson | 9:21 am, April 16, 2010

On Politico’s Arena today, the question is, why are Inside the Beltway political manipulators so impressed with President Obama while his approval ratings are tanking? I posted this reply:

Clear The Bench Colorado media coverage at Tax Day Tea Party rallies across the state

by CTBC Director | 9:12 am, April 16, 2010

Clear The Bench Colorado was well represented at several of the Tax Day Tea Party rallies across the state – Director Matt Arnold spoke at both the Denver and Fort Collins events, and spokes-people (no spokes-dogs, this time) were also at the Colorado Springs, Pueblo, and Grand Junction events.
Not surprisingly, however, the mass-media (lamestream?  LEMMing?) [...]

Tea Parties, Jane Norton, Ken Buck and the GOP

by David K. Williams, Jr. | 8:52 am, April 16, 2010

For U.S. Senate, I will be voting for whomever emerges the winner of the primary between Libertarian candidates John Finger and Maclyn Stringer.

The Colorado Supreme Court and the CU gun ban

by David K. Williams, Jr. | 8:16 am, April 16, 2010

The Colorado Court of Appeals overturned the University of Colorado’s gun ban on campus. (Special shout out to my friend Jim Manley, the lawyer who argued the case on behalf of the good side.)

Elections have consequences

by Rossputin | 5:57 am, April 16, 2010

Yesterday, over at RedState.com, Erick Erickson pilloried Indiana Senate candidate Dan Coats for his years-ago statement (during the confirmation of Ruth Bader Ginsburg) that “There was a centuries-old tradition of respecting national electoral results by granting the President latitude in selecting nominees for the bench.”

Erickson says that Coats’ statement is a good reason to vote for Marlin Stutzman, Coats’ Republican opposition for the GOP nomination despite the fact that “Dan Coats walking that back, calling his vote for Ginsberg a mistake.”

Erickson has it wrong now; Coats had it right then.

Of the clearest rights of a president is to nominate judges of his choosing.  And the words of our Founders made it clear that they did not intend the Senate’s “advice and consent” process to be about judicial philosophy, but rather about making sure the nominee was chosen through a corrupt process.  I would also believe that the Founders would disapprove of a nominee who was manifestly unable or unwilling to protect and defend the Constitution.  But the would certainly frown on a Senate blocking a nominee who was simply a bit too liberal or too conservative for a majority or even a minority of the senators’ tastes.

I’ve written about this in great detail before, including criticizing then-Republican Arlen Specter for misusing the Senate’s “advice and consent” function.

I stand by my analysis which means I stand by my view that Erick Erickson is wrong.  I don’t love the idea of unilateral disarmament, but once our side starts behaving like their side, we’re lost…as we’ve seen with the behavior of congressional Republicans during the presidency of George W. Bush, especially during his second term.

Republican Senators should, as I have said before, use the opportunity of a Supreme Court nomination to explain to the country the importance of the selection of a Justice. They should also explain how the particular nominee has views that much of the public won’t like.  But a nomination is not a second election and that nominee should be approved unless he or she is chosen through a corrupt process or is reasonably believed to be incompetent or unwilling to understand, protect, and defend the Constitution.

Elections have consequences, whether we like it or not.  People get the government they deserve.  Sometimes you just have to live with your mistakes.  This is likely to be one of those times.

If anything, then, a decent reason to vote against Dan Coats would be his willingness to abandon a view which he knows to be correct in the interest of appealing to an angry Republican base in Indiana.  I understand and share voter anger, but if that anger stems from recognition that the Democratic Party is racing away from the Constitution, it doesn’t strike me as smart or principled to take another step in that same unAmerican direction out of political spite.

Thoughts on the Russian “charm offensive” with Poland

by Rossputin | 5:43 am, April 16, 2010

Yesterday, Stratfor released a bit of analysis entitled “The Sympathy Gap, copied below.

My response to Stratfor was as follows:

There are two main reasons not to hope or expect that the Obama Administration will effectively counter Russia’s “charm offensive” with Poland.  First, at the highest levels of the administration, including President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton, it’s been an extremely long time since America has had a less competent, less experienced duo.  They simply don’t have enough understanding of the complexities and subtleties of foreign affairs.  Barack Obama seems to think that his winning smile and “historic” election will cause eyes to mist over and follow him across the globe.  Hillary is not far behind in her realism.

Second, unlike most presidents and Secretaries of State in my memory, this pair – and especially Obama – seem to disapprove of the amount of power and influence that the US has, even with its allies.  They feel as if they take a morally superior position when they not only avoid using American power but actually diminish what power we have.  Those are two extremely different things, of course.  Not using power can be a rational tactic.  Reducing the power of one’s own nation out of some strange sort of liberal guilt borders on treasonous stupidity.

Thus, even if Obama and Clinton were smart enough to recognize the problem Stratfor exposes, the chances of them doing anything to reclaim the hearts and minds of our should-be allies in Poland is very small.

UPDATE: As if to prove my point, following the “nuclear summit”, Obama said “Whether we like it or not, we remain a dominant military superpower.”

The Sympathy Gap

F

MET IN WASHINGTON, D.C., on Monday for a historic two-day nuclear summit. The last time a summit like this took place was when the momentous Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1968 was signed. STRATFOR has seen nothing significant come from the preparations for this summit, though. We are far more interested in the bilateral meetings U.S. President Barack Obama is having with various foreign leaders at the event, and are watching those carefully. Otherwise, the summit itself seems relatively directionless.

Our attention is primarily focused on another major event taking place on the other side of the world: the Russian “charm-offensive” following the tragic plane crash that killed the president of Poland and a slew of high-ranking Polish government officials. The presidential plane — carrying 97 passengers — crashed near the Katyn Forest, where the vociferously anti-Russian president intended to mark the 70th anniversary of a massacre of Polish officers by Soviet troops. The somber occasion turned into a national tragedy.

Whether genuine or not, the outpouring of support, sympathy and solidarity by Russia seems highly orchestrated.

Russian response to the tragedy has been swift and comprehensive:

• Prime Minister Vladimir Putin sprang into action, immediately coordinating investigative efforts on the ground, and consoling Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk in a highly emotional laying-of-the-wreaths crash site ceremony that dominated global airwaves over the weekend.
• Russian media covered the event closely and with considerable gravitas and emotion, especially the international English language Russia Today (RT), which carried the most expansive coverage of the event in the world.
• Russian President Dmitri Medvedev made a moving televised address to the Polish nation in which he announced that April 12 would be a day of mourning throughout Russia.
• Moscow’s Mayor Yuri Luzhkov outlined considerable efforts by the city government to arrange lodging and transportation for victims’ families traveling from Poland to Moscow to identify the bodies.
• Visa restrictions were eased to allow families of the victims to travel to Russia.
• Nashi, the Russian nationalist (and typically virally anti-Polish) youth movement ostensibly controlled by the Kremlin, organized vigils and wreath-laying at the Polish Embassy in Moscow, the same site where numerous Nashi protests against Poland have taken place.
• Rossija, Russia’s national television station, aired Polish-made “Katyn” — a movie about the WWII massacre — during prime time on Sunday.

Meanwhile, the United States responded to the tragedy with a somber — but comparatively uninspiring — statement by Obama, which praised Polish President Lech Kaczynski’s leadership and Poland’s alliance. The U.S. media covered the event, but concentrated on the reaction of the Polish-American community on the U.S. side of the equation. In short, the U.S. response has been far less expressive than the Russian response.

This led us to wonder whether there is — to borrow Cold War phraseology — a “sympathy gap” developing between Washington and Moscow’s response to the tragedy.

In the long term, no amount of sympathy will convince the Poles that Russia does not represent a geopolitical threat. Poland is nestled between Germany and Russia, and has had to face a two-pronged aggression that led to national tragedy in the 18th century (the three partitions of Poland, which ended its existence on European maps), in 1863 (the January Uprising, which solidified Prussian-Russian alliance) and in 1939 (an attack by German-Soviet forces). In the short term, however, the sympathy gap in the wake of the Kaczynski plane crash may foster in Polish people’s minds the idea that the United States has abandoned Warsaw. Events (or the lack thereof) in recent months have created the impression among many in Poland that the United States is not a committed ally.

Despite the promise from Washington to deploy a Patriot missile battery and U.S. boots on the ground to Poland, many see Obama’s failure to reassure Poland that Washington stands behind it with security guarantees as a sign that the United States lacks the credibility it needs to stand up to Moscow over Poland if push comes to shove. After all, Poland may understand its precocious geography, but it also has a deep memory of alliances with Western powers that amounted to very little when they were needed most.

Meanwhile, the Kremlin’s “charm offensive” has illustrated to the United States and the West in general that Moscow has a sophisticated and nuanced set of tools in its foreign policy arsenal. Anyone who thinks that Russia will need to roll tanks across borders in its sphere of influence — like it did in Georgia in August 2008 — has to rethink their assessment of Russian strategy. It has turned back Western influence in Ukraine through democratic and free elections, and in Kyrgyzstan with an apparently grassroots revolution that reminds us of Western-initiated color revolutions. Moscow does not want to integrate Poland into its sphere of influence. It wants Warsaw — the largest and most powerful Central European state — to remain a neutral player on the sidelines as it consolidates control over the former Soviet Union, particularly Belarus and Ukraine.

If the United States plans to enlist Poland in its efforts to roll back Russian influence, it will have to begin by addressing the “sympathy gap.” Such an opportunity may present itself on April 18, the day Obama goes to Warsaw for the funeral of the Polish president.

My letter to the NY Times regarding health care consumption

by Rossputin | 5:06 am, April 16, 2010

The NY Times ran a letter by me in their Sunday issue in response to a ridiculous article by one of their most ridiculous columnists, David Leonhardt. Leonhardt blamed everyone but the real culprits for the overconsumption of health care services in America.

I tried to set him straight. Of course, my letter is sandwiched between two letters from liberals who clearly have drunk the Obama/NY Times kool-aid.

Still, it’s a challenge to get the Times to print a letter, so I’m feeling pleased with myself.

You can read the letter here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/12/opinion/l12leonhardt.html

(By agreement with the Times, I am not allowed to reprint the letter on my own web page.)

Can members of Congress keep the health plan they like?

by Brian Schwartz | 1:30 am, April 16, 2010

“If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.” – Barack Obama, August 8, 2009
The New York Times reports:
n a new report, the Congressional Research Service says the law may have significant unintended consequences for the “personal health insurance coverage” of senators, representatives and their staff members.
For [...]

Denver Tax Day Tea Party 2010: Wrap-Up Report

by T.L. James | 10:34 pm, April 15, 2010

Some short notes on the 2010 Denver Tax Day Tea Party, along with some more media items: The crowd reports I’ve seen so far put the attendance in the 2000+ range. This seems to be a bit low, based on what I saw and on experience from previous rallies. Plus, this doesn’t account for the [...]

Tax Day Tea Party Speech

by Al Maurer | 9:31 pm, April 15, 2010

I was privileged today to have a few minutes to speak to the crowd at Acacia Park in Colorado Springs. I kept fiddling with the wording, but for those who weren’t there, this is awfully close to what I said: Good morning fellow Patriots! It’s a great day to be an American. About 160 years [...]

Colorado Springs Tea Party

by Al Maurer | 9:29 pm, April 15, 2010

The crowd gathered early (above). Richard Randall from KVOR, who emceed last year and this, said the crowd looked bigger this time. I didn’t have his view last year, but it certainly didn’t seem any smaller to me. At one point somebody on stage asked for a show of hands of people who came last [...]

TAX DAY REVOLT- Washington DC 2010

by El Marco | 4:15 pm, April 15, 2010

Washington DC, Thursday,April 15 – by El Marco
The Tea Party Express, which started its journey in Senator Harry Reid’s hometown – Searchlight, Nevada – finished its tour of 43 cities today. Thousands from across the country gathered at 10 a.m. to hear speakers and musicians, and to show their displeasure with big corrupted government. This [...]

Ken Buck disappoints backers; Q1 fundraising only $118,791 + $100,000 loan from Buck

by Donald E. L. Johnson | 2:31 pm, April 15, 2010

Amazingly, outside groups are willing to fund Ken Buck’s U.S. Senate campaign even though he is a weak fundraiser. Will the outside groups seeking a pure hard right conservative candidate continue to pour money into the campaign of a candidate who hasn’t earned enough respect from political contributors to raise as much as Republican U.S. House candidates who are facing well-financed incumbent Democrats? 
In the first quarter, Buck raised $118,791 from 

Not All is Good News Out of Florida: Charlie Crist Vetoes Tenure Reform SB6

by Eddie | 2:10 pm, April 15, 2010

Update: Reactions to Governor Crist’s decision are pretty strong, including the Eduwonk giving Crist the ironic “it’s all about the kids” award and Andy Smarick labeling the move “the most disappointing education policy decision by a major Republican officeholder in recent memory.”
Just a short post today: Bad education reform news from the state of Florida [...]

Colorado’s Business Climate

by Jon Caldara | 6:49 am, April 15, 2010

On this week’s Independent Thinking, I am joined by economist and Independence Institute Senior Fellow Barry Poulson and Tom Flanagan, Division President of Citywide Banks, for a conversation about the state of Colorado’s business climate and economy and the economic outlook for 2010. That’s this Friday at 8:30 PM on KBDI Channel 12. [...]

Tax Day & Tea Party thoughts

by Rossputin | 6:37 am, April 15, 2010

Although today is the most important trading day of the month, I’m heading down to the Colorado State Capitol building to participate in the second Tax Day Tea Party.

As you sign your tax return and send the IRS your money or think about the money they’ve taken from your paycheck over the course of the year or think about a year bad enough that you don’t owe them money, take a moment to think about some of the following and the implications for our nation:

• In 2009, the percentage of Americans who will pay no federal income taxes has risen to 47%.
• In 2007, the top 1% of earners paid 40% of all income taxes.  The top 5% paid 61% and the top 10% paid 71%.  The bottom 50% of earners paid less than 3% of all income taxes.  This extreme redistribution of wealth was probably worse in 2008 and will be worse again with 2009 tax filings.
• 2008 data is more preliminary, but shows “that taxpayers earning less than $100,000 collectively earned roughly half the Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) that year, but paid 25 percent of the income taxes. Meanwhile, taxpayers earning more than $250,000 paid close to half (46 percent) of the income taxes collected while they earned roughly a quarter of the total AGI” according to the Tax Foundation.
• In 2008, a record 51.6 million tax filers owed no income tax or were net receivers of money from other taxpayers, a 59% increase since 2000.
• For 2010, including various Obama tax provisions, people will be able to earn over $50,000 in a year and not owe any income tax.
• A new Gallup poll shows 63% of Americans believing their taxes will go up in the next year, including a majority of those earning under $30,000 a year.  4% believe their taxes will be lower.
• Similarly, a Rasmussen poll shows 2/3 of respondents believing that America is overtaxed, with only 25% disagreeing.

And if none of that makes your blood boil, how about this fact from the Tax Foundation:

Americans will pay more taxes in 2010 than they will spend on food, clothing and shelter combined.

Please attend your local Tax Day Tea Party and let “them” know that we’re mad as hell and we’re not going to take it anymore.

 

Speaking of taxes…

by Rossputin | 6:18 am, April 15, 2010

H/T WhoSaidYouSaid.com

In a performance which I hope and trust will haunt Barack Obama at least through his next election, he took over 17 minutes rambling on, trying to defend his failing and failed policies, obviously doing anything possible to avoid answering one lady’s very simple question…

See for yourself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MV0rtdjYcA

Libertarian Litigators Take on “Policing for Profit”

by Mike Krause | 6:10 am, April 15, 2010

(FYI – Inaugural post from Justice Policy Center Director Mike Krause.  Be on the lookout for more Krause wisdom in the future -Jon)
Our good friends at the libertarian-leaning public interest law firm Institute for Justice (IJ) have put out a tremendous new report on abusive civil asset forfeiture practices in the United States called “Policing [...]

Colorado Tea Parties: Citizen Journalism Open Thread

by T.L. James | 6:03 am, April 15, 2010

It’s Tax Day Tea Party time across Colorado and across the nation! If you’ve attended one of Colorado’s many tea party rallies today and have video or photos or an after-event report to share, please post your links in the comments to this post. (Note: PPC’s spam filter may hold your comments for moderation if [...]

The AIDS Party

by Ari Armstrong | 11:27 pm, April 14, 2010

Colorado Republicans never cease to astound me. Here were are, on the eve of a major “Tax Day Tea Party,” when plenty of Americans are irritated with the Democrats over intrusive government, and Colorado Republicans issue a media release reminding ever…

« go back — keep looking »

Featured Posts

• Judge Rules Americans Can Be Forced to Testify Against Themselves

  In order to protect our rights, our security must be protected. In order to protect our security, our rights must be invaded. Nothing wrong with that, is there?

• World Economic Forum in Switzerland: Global Elites Celebrating Hypocrisy
• SCOTUS decision on warrantless GPS surveillance produces an expected friend of privacy
• You didn’t want your Fifth Amendment rights, anyway, did you?
• Keynesian Economists Finally Catch Up and Agree: China to Have Hard Landing
• The Beauty of Private Property—from China?
• Regime Uncertainty, Regulatory Surge, and Unemployment Numbers