Monday, November 26, 2018

Climate Change Commentary. Putin Challenges. There Is A High Financial/Social Cost Of Illegal Immigration. Wanting It To Happen. A Thesis Regarding Presidential Candidates.


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Politics and Sports: Keep Your Hands Off My Football

Sports has a unique ability to unite our communities and our nation. Until recently, that is. How did sports get so politicized? Clay Travis, host of Outkick the Show, tackles the country’s cultural divide and its effect on our favorite pastime.
btn-play-now.png
++++++++++
I believe a report on climate change was just released which concluded such is taking place and will impact global GDP  significantly in the ensuing years.  Trump, is reported to have said his own administration is going to release it's own report that will be more definitive, whatever that means.

I have not doubt  man impacts weather. I have no doubt weather is changing and possibly is causing some serious problems.  However, weather encompasses the entire globe so that means the economic burden cannot simply be borne by America because that will put us at an economic disadvantage, which our adversaries would love, and climate change would not be positively effected.

To be effective you need every nation to do their proportionate share and there must be enforcement.  The Paris Accord was like a movie set.  All up front and nothing in the rear.

America has done a tremendous amount of attending to our own climate issues and we are continuing to do so.  There are some scientific issues that remain challenged  and the cost benefits also remain unresolved.

Progressives always have a solution to everything and it is called spend more money.  Education comes to mind and we have spent more money and things have gotten worse not better.

Once again Trump haters assert he is opposed to clean air.  Being a "commercialist," I have no doubt he is far less impressed with scientific evidence that has many knowledgeable detractors and whose cost does not appear justified based on questionable results  and theoretical projections

Progressives can always find a cause to support on which money can be spent and when their reasoning is challenged they get testy and tend to yell "baby killer." When it comes to social issue challenges they yell "racist."

Climate change is another sensitive issue that evokes more heat than light and fits a long such contentious list that have been politicized/weaponized  like abortion, illegal immigration, police brutality etc.

I am willing to assume we should be concerned about climate change.  I am not sure I have heard any sensible solutions that will accomplish the goal at a calculable cost.

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/11/exposed-a-key-element-of-the-wind-energy-fraud.php?tsize=large&size=large

And:

The Climate Won’t Crash the Economy

By 

A worst-case scenario projects annual GDP growth will be slower by 0.05 percentage point.


Headlines warned of economic doom after the U.S. government released its fourth National Climate Assessment last week. Yet a close reading of the report shows that the overall economic impact of human-caused climate change is expected to be quite small.
Projecting human-caused changes in the global climate is a major scientific challenge; estimates of the temperature increases due to rising greenhouse-gas concentrations are uncertain by a factor of three. Trying to make projections for a particular region—such as the contiguous U.S., which comprises only 1.6% of the globe’s surface—compounds the uncertainty. Estimates of the economic impact are less certain still, in part because as-yet-unknown modes of adaptation will mitigate the effects.
The report’s numbers, uncertain as they are, turn out not to be all that alarming. The final figure of the final chapter shows that an increase in global average temperatures of 9 degrees Fahrenheit (beyond the 1.4-degree rise already recorded since 1880) would directly reduce the U.S. gross domestic product in 2090 by 4%, plus or minus 2%—that is, the GDP would be about 4% less than it would have been absent human influences on the climate. That “worst-worst case” estimate assumes the largest plausible temperature rise and only known modes of adaptation.
To place a 4% reduction in context, conservatively assume that real annual GDP growth will average 2% in the coming decades (it has averaged 3.2% since 1935 and is currently 3%). That would result in a U.S. economy roughly four times as large in 2090 as today. A 4% climate impact would reduce that multiple to 3.8—a correction much smaller than the uncertainty of any projection over seven decades. To put it another way, the projected reduction in the average annual growth rate is a mere 0.05 percentage point. The U.S. economy in 2090 would be no more than two years behind where it would have been absent man-caused climate change.
Experts know that worst-case climate projections show minimal impact on the overall economy. Buried in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s 2014 report is a chart showing that a global temperature rise of 5 degrees Fahrenheit would have a global economic impact of about 3% in 2100—negligibly diminishing projected global growth over that period to 385% from 400%.
If we take the new report’s estimates at face value, human-induced climate change isn’t an existential threat to the overall U.S. economy through the end of this century—or even a significant one. Changes in tax policy, regulation, trade and technology will have far greater consequences for Americans’ economic well-being.
There are many reasons to be concerned about a changing climate, including disparate impact across industries and regions. But national economic catastrophe isn’t one of them. It should concern anyone who supports well-informed public and policy discussions that the report’s authors, reviewers and media coverage obscured such an important point.
Mr. Koonin, a theoretical physicist, is a University Professor at New York University. He served as undersecretary of energy for science during President Obama’s first term.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
My friend writes no one want to stop Putin.  Or they are afraid to do so. (See 1 and 1a below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I have no objection to those who wish to immigrate to America as long as they do so legally and the law are changed to correct some of the obvious  failures of our current policies.

Having said the statistics revealed by the current approach are staggering, unsustainable and defy logic.

Congress see no reason to do what is best for our nation because Republicans want to avoid being called racists and do not want the political fall out and Democrats have succeeded acquiring new voters paid for through tax dollars.

And so it goes in La La Land until everything eventually collapses and the blame game begins.  (See 2 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
the Trump haters want it to happen. (See 3 below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Those of you who read what I write know I have been saying once newspapers were no longer owned by families and/or individuals and became corporate entities they became entertainment vehicles and their focus became profit versus professionalism.

I want to carry this proposition one step further.

I am not suggesting the main reason for those who now become candidates for the highest office in the land is due to the decline in press and media  professionalism. However,  I do believe it has a significant bearing on the type of person who now runs, is nominated and thus wins.

The focus by reporters, the questions asked and the responses shapes the type of candidate who has public appeal and thus, is successful in my opinion.  Trump knows a lot about media and how to manipulate those in it.  That is not to say he did not have other personal and executive accomplishments that served him well against his more bland adversary who had a long history of being a loser who projected a negative image and carried baggage that was unappealing.

In essence, the less professional the mass media the more likely we will lower the bar on those who seek to become presidents.

I invite your comments.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
More wisdom  from Sowell:



well-15

well-14
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dick
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1)Again with the Crimea:  No One Wants to Stop Putin

By Sherwin Pomerantz

On Monday of this week the president of the Ukraine got the country’s parliament to approve martial law and put the nation on a war footing with Russia.

This in reaction to Russia’s seizure on Sunday of three small Ukrainian naval vessels and 23 sailors (Ukraine really does not have what one could call a navy per se) which was the first overt armed conflict between the two sides since the beginning days of 2014 when Russian special forces occupied Crimea.  And once again Russian President Vladimir Putin has decided to test the resolve of the west in limiting his dreams of regional control.

It 2014, then US President Barack Obama declared there were no easy answers nor military solutions to the Crimea crisis, but cast Vladimir Putin's Russia as a lonely villain shredding the international rulebook to bully a smaller neighbor.  Russia's seizure of Ukraine's Black Sea peninsula did not herald a new cold war, Obama told 2,000 people gathered in Brussels.  But it was also clear that the Kremlin's actions leading up to the seizure of Crimea had triggered a deep shift in western perceptions of Putin that everyone expected would see Russia increasingly isolated internationally and exposed to a spiraling trade war with the west, depending on his next moves.

But it did not happen that way.  It was clear Obama had no intention of being drawn into rash action or any kind of dangerous confrontation with Putin over Ukraine. "This is not another cold war that we're entering into. The United States and NATO do not seek any conflict with Russia," Obama said. "Now is not the time for bluster … There are no easy answers, no military solution."  All that happened was that Russia was removed from the G8 group which then became the G7.

So while the world cannot blame Obama directly for Putin’s seizure of Crimea, US President Trump tried to do so in June of his year when he said it was former President Barack Obama's fault that Russia invaded Ukraine and annexed Crimea in 2014.  “President Obama lost Crimea just so you understand, this was before I got there," Trump said while speaking with reporters outside of the White House. "President Obama lost Crimea." Trump claimed this was because Russian President Vladimir Putin didn't "respect" Obama. "President Obama lost Crimea because president Putin didn't respect President Obama, didn't respect our country and didn't respect Ukraine," Trump said.

Trump made similar comments regarding Obama and Crimea later at the G7 summit in Canada, where he called for Russia to be readmitted to the group. "Whether you like it or not, and it may not be politically correct, but we have a world to run," the president said at the time. "And in the G7, which used to be the G8 — they threw Russia out — they should let Russia come back in because we should have Russia at the negotiating table."  Russia was kicked out of the group in 2014 as a result of its annexation of Crimea.

But, of course, Trump will not do anything about Russia’s current flap with Ukraine either even though he believes that Putin respects him.  Obama did not get involved because he abhorred military intervention.   Trump will not get involved because in his own view of world politics he respects Putin when he acts like a bully because it mirrors Trump’s personality.

But for those of us who plod along every day trying to live normal lives in this abnormal world, the core problem is the same with Trump as it was with Obama.  Neither one of them saw/see the need for a policeman in the world nor wanted/wants America to play that role.  And that continued inaction on America’s part makes the world a more dangerous place for all of us.

In fact, the world without a policeman is, as Trump said late last week in comments about America’s free pass to the Saudis, a vicious place prone more to chaos than to order.  What has kept the world more or less orderly since the end of World War II was the role the United States played as the policeman.  When there is no authority figure the despots of the world feel empowered to grab whatever they want by force because they know that there will be no price to pay for their actions.

4th Century Greek statesman Demosthenes said “Close alliances with despots are never safe for free states.”  He saw clearly what is at risk when despots are empowered.  Sad that our political leadership is not that astute.  


1a)  

Putin Tests Trump on Ukraine

The Russian is watching the response to his latest military aggression.

By The Editorial Board

Vladimir Putin’s method is to probe for weakness in adversaries, and then see if there is any push back to his aggression. That’s what he seems to be doing again in the Kerch Strait off Crimea, as Russian forces Sunday seized three Ukrainian naval vessels and 24 crew members.
Russia says the ships were detained after performing dangerous maneuvers in Russian waters, but that is unlikely. Ukrainian ships use the waterway to gain access to its ports in the Sea of Azov, and they’ve been the target of increasing Russian harassment in recent months.
Perhaps Mr. Putin figures now is a good time to escalate and embarrass Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, who faces an election in March. He also may see a Western alliance whose leaders are under domestic pressure: Angela Merkel has had to cede her party’s leadership in Germany, Emmanuel Macron is facing riots over a new fuel tax in France, Britain’s Theresa May is struggling to sell her Brexit deal, and Donald Trump suffered a midterm election defeat.
In this context, Mr. Trump did well to say Monday that he’s “not happy” with Russia’s aggression. Nikki Haley, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, also denounced “yet another reckless Russian escalation” and said it would “further sour Russia’s relations with the U.S. and many other countries.”
Mr. Trump criticized Barack Obama for tolerating Mr. Putin’s seizure of Crimea, but now the Russian is testing Mr. Trump. The American should make clear during the G-20 summit this week that such aggression will be met with more arms sales to Ukraine and tougher sanctions on Russia. The Kremlin strongman will be watching for signs of weakness.
. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2)
The biggest factor of why Seniors are losing more and more benefits. They are getting blamed for  part of our country’s increasing deficit.

It's easy to dismiss individual programs that benefit non-citizens until they're all put together and this picture emerges.
Someone did a lot of research to put together all this data. Often these programs are buried within other programs making  it difficult to find each of them.

The following 11   reasons should be forwarded over and over again until they are read so many times that the readers gets sick of reading them. Included are the URL's for verification   of all the following facts.
1 .  $11 Billion to $22 Billion is spent on welfare to illegal immigrants each year by state    governments.
Verify At:
http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=iic_ immigrati onissuecenters7fd8
 http://www.fairus.org/site/  Pag eServer?pagename=iic_immigrati onissuecenters7fd8  >
2 .   $22 Billion dollars a year is spent on food    Assistance   programs such as food stamps, WIC,    and free school lunches for illegal immigrants.
Verify   At:

  http://www.cis.org/articles/  20 04/fiscalexec.HTML
About the Author Steven A. Camarota is Director of Research at the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, D.C. He holds a master's degree in political science .

3 .   $2.5 Billion dollars a year is spent on Medicaid for illegal immigrants.
Verify At:
< http://wwwcis.org/articles/ 2004/fiscalex ec.HTML 
About the Author Steven A. Camarota is Director of Research at the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, D.C. He holds a master's degree in political science .

4 .   $12 Billion dollars a year is spent on Primary   and secondary school education for children here illegally and they cannot speak a word of English! 
Verify At:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/ TRA NscriptS/0604/01/ldt ... 0.HT ML
;http://transcripts.cnn.com/ T RA NscriptS/0604/01/ldt ... 0.HT ML   
5 .   $17 Billion dollars a year is spent for Education for the   American-born   Children   of illegal immigrants, known as Anchor babies.
Verify At:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/ TRA NscriptS/0604/01/ ldt.01.HT MLhttp://transcripts.cnn.com/ T RA NscriptS/0604/01/ ldt.01.HT ML
6  $3 Million Dollars a DAY is spent to incarcerate illegal immigrants. 
Verify At:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/%20  TRANscriptS/0604/01/ldt.01. HTM L 
TRANscriptS/0604/01/
 ldt.01.HT M L"http://transcripts.cnn. com/%20 TRANscriptS/0604/01/ldt.01.HTM L  "
target="_blank" rel="nofollow"
 http://transcrip  ts.cnn.com/%20TRANscriptS/ 0604 /01/ldt.01.HTML 
7  30% percent of all Federal Prison Inmates are illegal immigrants.
Verify At:\
https://owa.slugger.com/owa/Ur  lBlockedError.aspx
https://owa.slugger.com/owa/  Ur lBlockedError.aspx  
8  $90 Billion Dollars a year is spent on   Illegal   immigrants for Welfare & Social    Services by the American taxpayers.
Verify At:
http://premium.cnn.com/TRANSCI  PTS/0610/29/ldt.01.HTML
http://premium.cnn.com/  TRANSCI PTS/0610/29/ldt.01.HTML  
9.  $200 Billion dollars a year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal immigrants.
Verify At:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRA  NSCRI
http://transcripts.cnn.com/  TRA NSCRI  
10 .  In 2006, illegal immigrants sent home $45 BILLION in remittances to their Countries of origin.
Verify At: .
http:// rense.com/general75/ nih t.ht 
11.   The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration: Nearly One million sex crimes committed By   Illegal Immigrants In The United States.
Verify At:
//  www.drdsk.com/articleshtml
http://www.drdsk.com/  articlesh tml  
THE TOTAL COST IS   $338.3 BILLION A YEAR.

SINCE THERE ARE APPROXIMATELY 135 MILLION TAXPAYERS IN THE UNITED STATES, OVER $2,500.00 OF YOUR TAXES GO TO FUNDING ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS.

Are we THAT Stupid?
YES, FOR ALLOWING THOSE IN THE U.S. . CONGRESS TO GET AWAY WITH DOING THIS YEAR AFTER YEAR!

If this doesn't bother you, then just delete the message.
If, on the other hand, it does raise the hair on the back of your neck, I hope you forward it to every Tax Payer in the United States!!!
 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3)The Recesion Myth
By Stephen Moore
There's an old saying that Wall Street economists have predicted eight of the last two recessions. The bears in the economics profession keep getting paid a lot of money misreading the nation's economic weather vanes -- whether it was the power and durability of the Reagan expansion in the 1980s, the ferocious bull market of the late 1990s, the after-effects of the 9/11 attacks, or most recently the phenomenal revival of growth in President Donald Trump's first years in office.

Most of Wall Street's top economic gurus thought Trump would crash the stock market and the world economy, and here we are with near 4 percent growth over the past six months and a prediction for the year of close to 3.5 percent. That's not a crash. A stopped clock is right twice a day, but the Keynesians on Wall Street are hardly any better than that.

All of this is to say the recent frightening claims by Goldman Sachs chief economist Jan Hatzius and other scribes that the economy is likely to slide into recession or a serious skid next year with growth of 1.6 percent to 1.8 percent -- half our current pace -- should be greeted with a collective yawn.


Sure, the economy may slip into a recession by 2020. Who knows? The growth rate is cooling down from its blistering 4 percent pace of late. But the last people investors or employers should be listening to are the professional pessimists. Most of these forecasters are relying on a purely Keynesian analysis of the economy and are basing their gloom on the idea of the "sugar high" of the tax cuts and government spending hikes wearing off next year.

Just listen to this illogic from the Goldman Sachs report: "tighter financial conditions and a fading fiscal stimulus" from the Trump tax law and $300 billion of new spending will be "key drivers of the deceleration."

No. Any move to reduce government spending is a positive for the economy. This is why Trump should veto every spending bill headed his way between now and the 2020 election. In the 1990s, the economy boomed and the stock market soared even as government spending fell by 3.5 percentage points of GDP, the biggest amount since the end of World War II.

The tax cuts aren't primarily consumer-demand focused. The intention and effect of these tax cuts has been to incentivize American businesses to invest, build and hire by increasing their after-tax rates of return on domestic expansions. One impact has been that the United States is sucking capital in from the rest of the world, as reflected in the strength of the dollar.

This effect doesn't "wear off;" it is still picking up steam. The United States is simply a better place to invest in today than it was two years ago.

Equally flawed is the idea that the economic recovery has been going on for a decade and is now running out of gas. No, the boom began on Nov. 8, 2016, not in 2009. The recovery was anemic in the Obama years.

One reason Art Laffer, Larry Kudlow and I were so confident in our predictions to candidate Donald Trump that we could get four or five years of 3 to 4 percent growth was that the recovery from the Great Recession was so flat. We were running $2 trillion a year below trend from a normal recovery. There is still a lot of juice left in this economy.

Business investment is up about 7 percent -- notwithstanding the slowdown since August. Admittedly, the trends in the housing sector are worrisome -- thanks in no small part to the Fed rate hikes.

Trump is right that the Fed made a major error in its last go-around. The stock market sell-off dates back to the Fed rate hike announcements earlier this fall. The Fed was worried that the economy was growing too quickly at 4 percent. In the 1980s, we had quarters of 8 percent growth and years of above 5 percent growth. This corresponded with lower inflation. For the umpteenth time, Jerome Powell: Growth doesn't cause inflation.

Increased output reduces prices.

If there is anything good to come of the stock sell-off of recent weeks, it is that the Fed is now much less likely to stay on its path of ill-advised interest-rate hike destruction in 2019.

The other big concern is the trade talks with China. This is the unavoidable confrontation with a rogue nation, whose behavior economically, financially and militarily is hostile to the security and economic well-being of the United States.
Beijing's abusive trade practices and theft of U.S. intellectual property ($300 billion stolen per year), are intolerable. In the short term, the trade dispute is bad for growth, bad for consumers and bad for stocks. But if/when Trump prevails and gets the concessions from China, the market upside is gigantic.

There are a hundred reasons to be optimistic. Oil prices are likely to remain moderate, with gas prices below $3 a gallon, which is a giant tax cut for American consumers and industries. Construction and manufacturing are as strong as they've been in decades. The tax cuts don't start to expire until 2024 -- five years from now. Trump is likely to score more trade victories in the months ahead, thus isolating China and putting more pressure on President Xi Jinping to make a deal.

The deregulation agenda under Trump is likely to accelerate in 2019 and 2020 as the one lever the Executive Branch has to clear roadblocks to growth. Wages are rising now for the lowest-income Americans, as The Wall Street Journal recently reported. That should keep consumer spending at a healthy clip.

Trump chief economist Larry Kudlow says that "a recession is so far in the distance I can't see it." Nor can I.

The only ones who can see it are the Trump haters who want it to happen.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

No comments: