text:
 
SINGAPORE ART BOOK FAIR 26—28.06.2020
Every year we speak to a diverse range of people in an effort to develop and promote our local creative discourse. For 2018, we sat down with 21 creatives of various disciplines to learn about their practice and asked each of them to fill up a blank page in a notebook. For 2019, we gathered perspectives on our zine and art book culture, along with the possibilities of self-publishing today.
A Closer Look for SGABF2019: wares infoshop library The Convergence of Digital and Print Publishing Basheer Graphic Books Currency Syaheedah Iskandar Supernormal Zulkhairi Zulkiflee Zines Then and Now Norah Lea Divaagar 21 Creatives for SGABF2018: Hanson Ho Samantha Lo Liana Yang Charmaine Poh ASPIDISTRAFLY Teresa Lim Sobs Karen Tan Michael Ng Mary Bernadette Lee Deon Phua Janice Koh Ruben Pang Rebecca Toh Liao Jiekai Berny Tan Luca Lum Cyril Wong Atelier Hoko Lee Chang Ming Jacqueline Goh
HANSON HO
Photo Credit: H55
SGABF: You've run H55 independently since 1999. Why did you choose to stay independent after all these years?
HANSON HO (HH): Prior to that I hadn't really worked for anyone for very long. At that point, I was quite desperate to come out and be independent, not creatively but financially independent. I saw a dead end coming my way in the long run so I felt that the only way to propel myself and to accelerate my growth was really to set up my own studio. At the time I found that my predecessors in the industry were quite boring in the way they were being run. They were mostly brand consultants or publications designers who designed things like annual reports or newsletters whereas our counterparts in the West or even in Japan were doing a lot of things that were carrying independent voices — where their individualities were allowed to be expressed in their clients' works. I thought that this should be the way to go and since I couldn't win my predecessors, I had to change the game. So if I wanted to come out on my own, I had to do something that is more individualistic, rather than just follow the ways of operation which were already established in the past.
I operate in a less hierarchical manner. The studio is fairly small and for many years, I rented it on my own and my clients from a very niche market found it refreshing because they are meeting the creative, the owner, and also the accounts manager — all in one. In a way that's what architects have been doing. To me, that's beneficial to the work rather than having too many people which might lead to miscommunication and also, having to bear the higher costs with a bigger team. So, the process is less formal because it's less hierarchical. The relationship that I have with my clients is more friendship-based. With this, my work becomes more individualistic and more expressive.
Some say the studio has a house-style, which is something that was not allowed previously. The mindset was that designers should have different ideas and styles to cater to different clients. But for H55, we have a fundamental belief and approach, and clients come to us for that.
Graphic designers don't generally have a style, they listen to what the clients want. For us, it's different. Our work, by and large, has a spectrum of look and feel, and a way of thinking. The clients then come to us for that, and not the other way around.
In terms of ownership, it is still independently-owned and of course, that makes a lot of things easier in terms of the culture and decision-making. I basically have full control of the creative direction and finances. For me, that control is very important. It allows me to steer in different directions, whenever needed. There is more freedom, and when there is more freedom, the work becomes more creative.
SGABF: You spearheaded and curated many projects, including LTA's Art-in-Transit Programme for the Downtown Line. Do you find that your approach differs when it comes to showcasing art on different platforms – from Biennales, gallery shows, to public spaces?
HH: We definitely need to cater to the collaborators' needs when we are working with someone but, by and large, the way of managing a project is the same for me. It's to identify and be extremely clear about the perimeters and limitations of the project and then brief the artists, designers, or myself to try and satisfy a number of checkboxes. It may sound very uncreative, but that's where the real creativity lies. Many designers or creatives say that a project cannot turn out well because of these limitations — money, space, etc. — but there are always escape routes and if you can find the escape route to every project, then all your projects will be portfolio material, works that you are proud to show rather than feel ashamed of.
I think it's about ignoring how people think it should be done. It helps to look at examples of good work or works that are good but not entirely relevant. For example, if you're designing a novel, it doesn't mean you can only refer to novels. You can look at magazines, posters, or even contemporary art, maybe that can inform the design. It is important that you don't have all these preconceived ideas, and you're not afraid or think that just because the client thinks a certain way, you have to do things differently. You can incorporate some of the client's thinking while showing them what other things are possible.
SGABF: What do you think is the current climate of Singapore's design, and where do you see it going in the next 10 years?
HH: There are definitely more younger designers and smaller studios that have sprouted in the last five to ten years, but still not very many. When I first started out in 1999, I was probably the only one. Thankfully I also had peers like Asylum and Kinetic who did the same thing, which I think is a significant movement. It was encouraging for each one of us; to see each of us doing something different but interesting. Right now I would say we're at the low point of the wave, where the scene is pretty slow and stagnant in some ways and will continue to be like that for awhile.
I try to create a map for myself and my work; where it's going in 20 to 30 years' time. As I continue to map my way into the future, thinking of what I do, I explore deeper into the craft. The works need to become better and more significant. My interest from the beginning was always to intervene with the culture in Singapore. Which means that I need to engage with the correct types of clients and audience so that my work, books, logos or brands stay and survive as part of the visual culture around us. They should become monumental as time passes, and not get thrown into dustbins like brochures. I hope to create these epitomes of things so that when I reach a certain old age, they will all be floating around Singapore and other parts of the world where people can find and enjoy.
SGABF: How do you perceive the cultural impact design has on a place and society like Singapore?
HH: I don't really like to proclaim that design can have a big cultural impact. It will definitely have some sort of impact but I don't think it will "save the world". However, I think what's more important is the acknowledgement that design is important, that design thinking is important and that having good taste is important — good taste in a broader context, not just dressing well and looking fashionable but having a healthy mindset that imagination, creativity and diversity as a way of life is important.
Design has undoubtedly influenced Singapore. I mean, everybody has become more image-savvy because of mobile devices, globalisation, access to all kinds of media and magazines, and different brands that have landed in Singapore. Singaporeans appreciate design a lot more now than when I first started. They do see the relevance of design, and that it's not something that is frivolous.
SGABF: Finally, SGABF2018 aims to provide a space for artists, designers, creatives, and consumers to think critically about art — in its various forms and formats. When it comes to critical thinking, what sort of questions or ideas do you hope people will hold in minds when engaging in a festival like that?
HH: Hopefully it will be, in a way, disruptive to how they would normally think about things and also to realise the importance of publishing. I hope the younger generation don't see art books as a kind of sentimental object because in a digital age, people see print, polaroids, photography, film photography, vinyls, as a nostalgic, sentimental thing. Hopefully, they see it as processes or a means that can help them to not just generate new ideas but question things that they always thought were a certain way; to disrupt the way they think and to see publishing as a kind of validation to self-existence. Because ultimately that's why people publish. It's not a sentimental thing like keeping a diary or a scrapbook, it's more than that. It is to validate that they are different. Whether you're publishing something into a book or on a website doesn't matter. We have to embrace diverse viewpoints and this can be expressed through publishing so that you can share these ideas with people.
H55 is an award-winning Singapore-based design and communication consultancy with a reputation for conceiving relevant, engaging and effective ideas. Since its establishment in 1999, H55 has been independently owned by award-winning creative director Hanson Ho, who continues his hands-on attitude towards design and project management. Till this day, H55 remains as a light and compact office so as to be creatively sustainable, focused and dedicated to a select range of clients. H55 has worked with a variety of clients ranging from government ministries, museums, public-listed companies, small-to-medium-sized enterprises, new startups and individuals.

ABOUT SGABF


All Axon and TASER device audit trails show events and changes for the selected device. The audit information can be filtered to a particular date range or show the entire life of the device.
The audit information is available in both PDF and comma-separated values (CSV) format, with each event, action, or change shown on a different line in the audit trail.
The PDF file has four columns: Item, Date/Time, Event, and Additional Information. The Item column is a numerical listing of the events, actions, or changes for this file and item number will change depending on the selected date range for the audit trail. The Event column has a short description of the event, action, or change. The Additional Information column has general camera status information such as remaining battery %, video count, MB remaining, and firmware version.
The CSV file has seven columns: Date Time, Action, Battery %, Video Count, Firmware Version, MB Remaining, and Unique ID. The Action column has a short description of the event, action, or change and corresponds to the PDF Event column. The Battery %, Video Count, Firmware Version, and MB Remaining columns have camera status information and correspond to the information shown in the PDF Additional Information column. The Evidence UID column is a unique string that is generated for all pieces of evidence on Evidence.com.
Note: For Axon Body 2 and Flex 2 cameras with v1.7 or earlier firmware release, only the camera registration, status change, and assignment information is available. The other events listed are available with the v1.8 or later firmware release for Axon Body 2 and Flex 2 cameras.
Search for the device you want to view.
In the device search results, click the device Serial No.
The Device Summary page is shown.
A dialog box with options selecting for the date range and file type is shown.
If you want to view the entire audit trail for the life of the device, select View entire audit trail.
If you want to view a portion of the audit trail, select View portion of audit trail and then specify a date in either or both the From or To boxes or click a shortcut for a date range, such as Yesterday.
Under Select File Type, click the file type, CSV or PDF, that you want.
Evidence.com generates and downloads the audit trail in the format you selected.


The Greenmount Association Annual Spring Farm Walk and AGM will take place on Wednesday 4th May 2016 commencing at 1pm on the 290 acre beef enterprise farm of Artie Birt, (30 Deerpark Rd, Portaferry, BT22 1PN).
No stranger to hosting farm walks Artie's farm, situated in the heart of the Ards Peninsula consists of 170 spring block calving suckler cows with all progeny finished with a strong focus on AI.
He mainly utilises Simmental, Limousin and Charolais genetics with all replacements calving at 24 months, with only two sweeper bulls required on the farm.
Typically 40 heifers are synchronised and AI'd to an easy calving maternal Simmental sire with the aim of introducing new bloodlines for future replacements. All beef produced on the Birt Farm is supplied to the ABP Food Group.
Artie has been involved with both AFBI and Teagasc in a recently completed two year research trial on benefits of "AI and synchronisation" in herd management, and is still involved in ongoing trials with AFBI on a similar theme. Artie has also participated in research on paddock grazing and aims to reseed 10% of the farm annually.
He has also had the Sainsbury's Carbon Footprint audit carried out for the past seven years.
Artie recently delivered a presentation at the Teagasc National Beef Conference in Athlone on 'Optimising use of AI in the suckler herd'.
When not farming Artie finds time to sit on the Sainbury's beef steering group which meets four to five times a year as well as being the area co-ordinator for his local buyer group. Artie's commitment to progressive and efficient farming techniques paid off last year when he was awarded the 2015 'NI Beef Farmer of the Year'.
A buffet supper followed by the AGM will take place at the Saltwater Brig, Kircubbin. The buffet will cost £10.
If you are interested in attending can you please inform Jackie McCann (028 9442 6725) stating whether or not you will be staying for the buffet.


text:
coolidge (6)
Rajjpuut's Folly: Does Pompous Barack Believe He is America's Messiah?
Posted by Bob VanDeHey on July 29, 2011 at 8:00am
"Civilization and profit go hand in hand."
"Collecting more taxes than is absolutely necessary is legalized robbery."
"Don't expect to build up the weak by pulling down the strong."
"Duty is not collective; it is personal."
"Economy is the method by which we prepare today to afford the improvements of tomorrow."**
All quotes by President Calvin Coolidge
Progressivism = Reactionary Politics,
Nihilistic Economics and Human Slavery
Most thinking voters now realize, progressivism is a hideous political philosophy based upon the belief that we must 'progress' beyond 'the ill-conceived and outdated U.S. Constitution' in order to make progress toward an earthly Utopia. What most, even clear thinking, people don't realize is that under the guise of "modernity" progressivism is an utterly reactionary approach to government. Totalitarian states and socialism have been the norm of human existence. Protecting people's right to self-govern, is something virtually unheard of across history. It is freedom for individuals; and economic freedom; and documents that proclaim those individual and economic freedoms which are comparatively new on the world scene.
This great experiment, this United States that has stood as the "Shining City on the Hill" for the world to aspire to . . . that is something most rare. Despite the specious modernity of the word 'progress,' progressivism means rule by elites and that is as old as human history. Until some people somewhere else create a society, a government, a promise of human excellence better than American at her peak . . . the driving force in human political aspiration must be to recreate and imitate America at her peak . . . and for Americans: to return to and surpass that peak.
Has the world really made such great progress since our Constitution was born in 1787 and purified in 1791 with the addition of the Bill of Rights? Think even further back to the Declaration of Independence . . . think on the inspiring words of Calvin Coolidge as true today as when he spoke about the Declaration of Independence a full 85 years ago:
It is often asserted that the world has made a great deal of progress since 1776, that we have had new thoughts and new experiences which have given us a great advance over the people of that day, and that we may therefore very well discard their conclusions for something more modern. But that reasoning cannot be applied to this great charter. If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with unalienable rights, that is final. If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, that is final. No advance, no progress can be made beyond these propositions. If anyone wishes to deny their truth or their soundness, the only direction in which he can proceed historically is not forward, but backward toward the time when there was no equality, no rights of the individual, no rule of the people. Those who wish to proceed in that direction cannot lay claim to progress. They are reactionary. Their ideas are not more modern, but more ancient, than those of the Revolutionary fathers.
In this moment in history when our present American president has no compunction whatsoever about moving us toward his sorry vision of Utopia . . . all of his supporters fooling themselves that they are racing headlong into a beautiful and rarely glimpsed future . . . imagine their shock if they were ever to succeed and then necessarily discover how much of all that they're striving to so cavalierly toss onto the trash heap of history is what all of mankind has so long been aspiring toward. A great pity that great classics like George Orwell's 1984 and Animal Farm or Aldous Huxley's Brave New World are no longer read and people instead watch sitcoms and reality television . . . .
As for our "fearless leader," it's a great misfortune that unlike Coolidge who treated his place in history very humbly, saying "It is a great advantage to a president, and a major source of safety to the country, for him to know that he is not a great man" -- it is obvious that Barack Obama mistakenly believes himself to be a great man. While Coolidge lived to serve his countrymen, Barack Obama lives that his countrymen might more deeply serve him.
** In contrast, in Obama's world today's debt is how we enslave tomorrow's children. Notice how the Coolidge quotes like Coolidge himself are soft-spoken but when you think about them you see just how powerful the concepts behind them are: for example, the ones above a) tying the rise of civilization to the rise of profits or surplus b) putting forward a reverse angle view of the Robin Hood mentality that would pull the rich down by taxation c) and d) tying in with b) and showing collectivism, progressivism, Marxism, socialism, and etc. up for the false religions they are and e) bringing up the duty we owe to posterity and a warning against enslaving them via debt while more obviously showing us the only proper way to live. By comparison, the more you examine Obama's words, the more empty they become . . . .
Tags: america's messiah, coolidge, freedom, economy, humble, individual, obama, pompous, progressives, progressivism
Rajjpuut's Folly: What Do the Chinese Know (and Do) That We Don't?
Posted by Bob VanDeHey on March 15, 2011 at 10:38pm
Is Trickle-Up Poverty the New Prosperity?
While being assaulted on all sides with Barack Obama's "trickle-up poverty" and other progressive government boondoggles like Obamacare on top of trillion-dollar national deficits as far as the eye can see and well beyond . . . a strange new phenomenon has emerged to further muddy the waters already obscuring our future hopes. China is now selling off American debt and ridding itself of dollars so that now the largest holder of American debt is . . . drum roll, please, Maestro! . . . the United States Federal Reserve Banking System. Yes, you read that correctly. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke is now in the voodoo economics business all the way up to his fuzzy skull.
Over the last three months, China has sold roughly $19 billion in treasury bonds and other U.S. debt instruments. China, in other words, has become concerned about the sheer size of the U.S. overall debt and the high probability that the Federal Reserve's unceasing money printing for the last twenty-nine months has debased and devalued the world's reserve currency for 'lo these last 60+ years: the American Dollar. Looking back in history that's exactly what happened to the British Pound Sterling which had been the World's Reserve Currency for over two hundred years until the Brits ousted Winston Churchill with World War II still not entirely won and brought in their Labour (progressive-liberal) Party to run the show. Labour inflated their once proud currency so much that the citizens and nations of the world began dumping the Pound and fleeing for gold, silver, the gold-backed Swiss Franc and most commonly for the American Dollar.
The American Federal Reserve now standing as the largest holder of U.S. Treasury debt means that financing Obama's third trillion-dollar federal budget deficit in succession has become something the rest of the world has begun to shy away from. China is still the largest foreign-holder of American debt, but the Chinese seem determined to remove their names from the top of that dubious list (other top foreign holders of U.S. debt instruments include: Japan, Russia, Brazil, India, Korea, England, France, Germany and Saudi Arabia). It also suggests that faith and trust in the "Almighty Buck" may be reaching a low-ebb.
Unlike hard money (gold and silver) and all hard-money backed currencies such as the Swiss Franc and the Kruggerand-backed South African money . . . paper money has zero intrinsic value . . . it only exists and continues to serve so long as people trust the government issuing the paper bills (and that goes double for a nation's paper debt instruments). Bernanke has run the printing pressings so long that on a sheer mathematical basis the dollar of today is technically worth only as much as 3.4 pennies compared to the dollar of late 2008 when the financial crisis reached its low spot and the U.S. government started stepping in. What's going on here? Why is Bernanke printing so much money?
Bernanke is a well-known student of the Great Depression and has written numerous articles suggesting that the reason the Great Depression turned from a "little-d depression" into a "capital-G/capital-D Great Depression" is because there was never sufficient money in circulation to head off relentless deflation. That is, he believes a vicious-circle of deflation was created and that the continuous dropping of prices fed off itself and destroyed jobs which destroyed buying power which destroyed businesses which destroyed more jobs, etc., etc.
There is some truth to what Mr. Bernanke suggests . . . but it's a lot like yanking your starting pitcher off the mound with the score going from 2-1 in the 6th to 8-1 against you in the 8th . . . once so much damage has been done . . . almost nothing will work. Perhaps the twirler should have been sent to the showers when he looked tired after 120 pitches before the start of the 7th? Or after he'd allowed a home run and walked the next two batters with no outs in the 7th? Poor decisions early in a process can make finding good decisions later . . . very, very difficult.
Rajjpuut suggests a different reading of history is more accurate. Almost precisely a full decade before the infamous 1929 stock market crash we had a depression start-up that 98% of Americans never heard about. Progressive Woodrow Wilson's so-called "Invisible Depression" started in late 1919 and was full-blown by the time Warren G. Harding was elected in November, 1920; and much worse when Harding took office in March of 1921 (they had a four-month Lame-Duck session in those days). Production had already dropped nation-wide by 26%. Ignoring the suggestions of his Commerce Secretary Herbert Hoover for immediate implementation of numerous government aid programs and other subsidies . . . Harding did only four things:
1. Cut government spending by 48%
2. Cut taxes by 49%
3. Paid down the nation's debt by 30%
4. Slashed government regulatory interference across the board
In fifteen months the economy had rebounded mightily (just a couple months later, Harding died in office so he barely got to enjoy his success). The United States was now well into the "Roaring Twenties" the most single prosperous rebound of any economy in the recorded history of the planet. Calvin Coolidge, Harding's vice-president continued the Harding policies faithfully, but chose "not to run" in 1928. One of the most popular men in America and a famous philanthropist and author, Herbert Hoover ran for the presidency for the Republicans and won in a landslide over Democrat Al Smith. Only three men in history have become president of the U.S. without extensive military or business executive or elected experience: Taft, Obama and Hoover.
Hoover was a famous geologist and mining engineer who married the daughter of a rich banker. He believed mightily in the "Efficiency Movement" (if you've read Cheaper by the Dozen, the father, Frank Gilbreth, was founder of the Efficiency Movement) and believed that the economy was riddled with waste and inefficiency which could be dramatically improved by "experts" like him once they identified the problems and solved them. Hoover became, according to the New York Times "one of the Ten Most Important Living Americans" for his charitable and humanitarian work during World War I.
Hoover administered distribution of over two and one-half million tons of food to nine million war victims and was later named head of the brand new U.S. Food administration by Woodrow Wilson when the country entered the War. A member of the Supreme Economic Council after the war, as well as head of the American Relief Administration he continued organizing shipments to millions of starving people in Central Europe. A well-known philanthropist, Hoover like Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson was like them a self-described "Progressive and Reformer."
He came to be known as "Wonder-Boy" during the Harding-Coolidge administrations for his notorious and comical lust for expanding portions of everybody else's bailiwicks into new roles for the Commerce Department. The reporters of his day called Hoover, "the Secretary of Commerce... and Under-Secretary of Everything Else!" Long before he had entered politics he had abandoned laissez-faire economic thinking. Outside of engineering and charitable work he was a terrible micro-manager always on the look out to fix what wasn't broken. History shows that Hoover did one very important thing as Commerce Secretary: he codified and standardized traffic lights across the nation.
As soon as he was elected president Hoover set about planning the undoing of much of the good work created by Coolidge and Harding. He raised government spending and taxes and debt. He initiated numerous "eleemosynary" style federal activities (reminiscent of his charitable work in World War I) to protect workers and farmers and businesses from the natural vicissitudes of the free market economy. His biggest mistake was instituting a huge tariff designed to protect American farm workers from foreign competition but remove such protections from business; the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act was to cause great consternation in the business world. The agricultural tariff increase was the second highest in U.S. history and put a lot of people out of work. Overall, once the stock market crashed in 1929, Hoover instituted the biggest big-government policies the nation had ever seen.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt (who had once praised Hoover in 1919 and tried to get him to run as the Democratic presidential candidate) and his v-p running mate Garner accused Hoover of being a socialist and promised that when elected they would:
1. Cut government spending severely
2. Cut taxes dramatically
3. Pay down the nation's debt
4. Slashed government regulatory interference across the board and eliminate many of the socialistic programs of Hoover
Since these amounted to little more than promises to do what Harding had succeeded with in 1921, people embraced FDR and he won in a landslide taking office in March 1933. History shows that the bottom of the Great Depression was reached in July, 1933, and the bottom of our own "Great Recession" was reached in March, 2009, in each case shortly after the new president took office. Ordinarily the expectation is that after the bottom is reached, prosperity begins to return within six months. In both FDR's and Barack Obama's cases, however, government interference made things much, much worse.
FDR, of course, did exactly the opposite of what he promised. He dramatically raised taxes and government spending and debt and deficits. He expanded all of Hoover's social and economic programs and added 40 of his own (just one law in 2010, Obamacare, created 384 new government agencies, so FDR was a piker compared to Barack) and made big government a way of life. He also confiscated gold coinage and then instituted an overnight inflation of 69% by pegging the dollar to gold at $35 per ounce (he'd given the citizens just $20.76) impoverishing the taxpayers while enriching the government. Of course doing what Harding did and avoiding what Hoover and FDR did is just common sense . . . something seemingly beyond Obama and Bernanke . . . .
In June, 2009, when the full-folly of the Obama policies began to outline themselves in sharp contrast to common sense . . . the Chinese held $896 billion in American debt; today they hold $764 billion a 15% reduction in greenback holdings. Since an outright flooding of the market with U.S. debt notes would destroy China as well as the U.S., it seems the Chinese are now buying up gold and silver in large quantities and making an orderly retreat from the dollar – leaving our suspect currency in the hands of less astute nations and of Ben Bernanke. Since the American trade deficit with China alone reached a record $273.1 Billion in 2010, the Chinese are going to have to work awfully hard to keep lowering their dollar holdings . . . so one suspects that gold and silver will continue to rise quickly.
Bernanke's monetary policy, known as "Quantitative Easing" a.k.a. "irresponsibly printing money," has seen the Federal Reserve recently buy up $600 billion worth of Treasury debt. Big Ben's plan is to hold down interest rates and thus help lower the cost of federal government borrowing (to cover the Obama deficits) and incidentally increase inflation which he believes will stimulate economic growth and create jobs. This is a very Keynesian economic philosophy. In the months prior to his death in 1946, John Maynard Keynes (as the ending of the British Pound Sterling's 200- year reign as the world's reserve currency approached) who had long preached against the classical economic wisdom of Adam Smith and Smith's "invisible hand of the marketplace," like an atheist seeking God at the last hour repented . . . .
As Britain's economic hole under the progressive Labor Party deepened, and his own death drew near, Keynes told Henry Clay of the Bank of England of his hopes that Adam Smith's "invisible hand" would somehow save the English economy and yank Britain out of the economic swamp it found itself in: "I find myself more and more relying for a solution of our problems on the 'invisible hand' which I tried to eject from economic thinking twenty years ago." The inflation destroyed the Pound Sterling as the Labor Party continued with government largesse and Keynes' deathbed conversion went to naught.
Here in America recent spikes in food prices and energy costs are a direct consequence of Bernanke's unofficial devaluation of the dollar. The government continues under-reporting of inflation assisted by the Labor Statistics Bureau's refusal to include fluctuations in prices of food and energy. Bernanke, however, believes that deflation is still the rule and continues to inflate the currency to avoid a second Great Depression. Since job creation by the private sector is the key, perhaps the government ought to try: cutting spending; cutting taxes; eliminating debt; and getting the government out of the way of the free market . . . oops, that's been mentioned before . . . .
Tags: government regulations, bernanke, china, coolidge, fdr, federal reserve bank, great depression, hoover, quantitative easing, debt
Rajjpuut's Folly: Rasmussen Poll Government Caused, Lengthened Great Depression
Posted by Bob VanDeHey on February 11, 2011 at 4:28am
Americans Now Learning Real History,
Might NOT Have to Repeat Ill-Effects
A recent Rasmussen Reports Survey seems to show that Americans are starting to understand that the country was NOT rescued from the Great Depression by government spending and government policies (a.k.a. interference in the free markets), but rather that the government actually cost the nation millions of jobs, intensified a normal recession with its increased spending, creating and lengthening the depression and eventually turning it into the "Great Depression." The lesson, however, is not necessarily transferring into a greater understanding of today's economics . . . .
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/general_business/february_2011/43_say_government_policy_mistakes_created_great_depression_of_1930s_26_disagree
According to the Rasmussen survey, 43% now say that government policy mistakes created the Great Depression of the '30s; while only 26% disagree and 31% say they are unsure. Americans, today however, are still greatly confused about the cause of the financial meltdown which, they think, began about October, 2007. More on that later . . . .
Despite the Rasmussen poll results, thanks to two and a half generations of revisionist history ,today far too many Americans still believe that Herbert Hoover was a) a conservative rather than a progressive b) that greedy Wall Street created the Great Depression c) that Hoover's administration spent almost nothing fighting the economic problems d) that government spending can create jobs in the private sector e) that in 1932 Franklin Delano Roosevelt campaigned for president against Hoover's "conservativism" f) that FDR did virtually everything entirely different than Hoover and g) that FDR saved the country from the Great Depression. Let's quickly put those lies to rest before dealing with today's situation, eh?
Since progressivism (we must 'progress' beyond the out-dated and seriously flawed U.S. Constitution if we are ever to make 'progress' toward an earthly socialist or even Marxist Utopia) first became a serious undercurrent in American Politics in the 1890's only once in the following 120 years has a serious economic downturn been handled by pure conservative restraint . . . and no, Ronald Reagan was NOT president when that happened (Reagan actually increased government spending while cutting taxes extra-severely and created some whopping deficits in the process of also creating twenty million jobs).
Teddy Roosevelt was our first progressive president. You'll remember that his "Bull Moose Party" was actually a third party officially known as, wait for it: the "Progressive Party." Teddy certainly had done a lot of questionable and presumably out-and-out unconstitutional things earlier when he was a Republican president, luckily most of them worked out pretty well for the nation. Perhaps a Progressive president once every century or so wouldn't be a bad thing, but certainly no more often?
Our first ultra-progressive president, Woodrow Wilson, however, was another story. Besides giving us the Federal Reserve Banking system and the income tax (still called today: "progressive" income tax), Wilson was a great propagandist who ran for a second term under the slogan "He kept us out of War" but within a month after his March, 1916 inauguration he deliberately and unnecessarily thrust us into World War I. He was the first truly big-spending president the country had ever known . . . way, way beyond the costs of the war. When his term was winding down, we were in a serious recession much worse than the recession sparked by the 1929 collapse. When he left office in March, 1921 the country was in a full-fledged depression.Curiously, those events are generally overlooked by history. People in the know, however, speak of "The Invisible Depression" or of the "Not-so-Great Depression." Why was the Invisible Depression so invisible we don't even know about it today?
Two things: 1) revisionist progressive historians have done everything possible to hide this quite remarkable set of events and keep us from comparing it to Franklin D. Roosevelt's approach while creating an enormous myth of FDR as a savior and 2) these policies worked out as the launching pad for the World's most expansive decade in free market history and gets lost in the shuffle while everyone writes books and novels and treatises about the "Roaring '20's" instead. What actually happened was this:
Warren G. Harding and his vice president, Calvin Coolidge took office in March, 1921 with a full-fledged economic contraction underway. The full story is available from the Cato Institute here:
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=9880
but let's sum it up briefly. Unemployment stood 150% higher than it was a year earlier; and GDP was only 76% of 1920 levels. Harding immediately cut government spending 49%; taxes 48%; and reduced government debt 30%. Unlike the business-bashing that Wilson, FDR, LBJ (Lyndon Johnson) and Obama are infamous for, the Harding administration did everything it could to get government out of business' way. In fifteen months the country was humming again and the Invisible Depression was over. When Harding died, VP, Calvin Coolidge continued the same policies saying "the business of America is business."
Where did Herbert Hoover come from? Hoover was a highly respected humanitarian with an engineering background that Harding installed as his Secretary of Commerce to appease certain Eastern Republican interests. Under both Harding and Coolidge was very ineffective. Hoover promoted government intervention under the rubric "economic modernization" and tried to get Harding to dole out unemployment benefits to ease the pain of the high 1921 joblessness. Through the next eight years both presidents Harding and Coolidge largely ignored Hoover.
Hoover was, in short a progressive . . . Some people are aware of that but here's what most don't know. At the end of World War II, Hoover's humanitarianism including involvement in a program akin to the Marshall Program after World War II which benefitted defeated Germany and the Bolsheviks in Russia. Hoover was so influential and well respected that the New York Times named him "One of the ten most important living Americans. Woodrow Wilson considered Hoover "my ideal successor," Democratic leaders looked upon Hoover as a strong presidential candidate and FDR said, "There could be none finer." Hoover, who up to then was a-political, said that because of his childhood memories, he had no interest in being a Democrat (supposedly the only Democrat in his home city was "the town drunk) and ignored Democratic overtures. Hoover decided he'd become a Republican and announced his candidacy for president but couldn't get much Republican support although he did finish 2nd in the 1920 California Primary. Despite the gridlock at the RNC Convention that year, Hoover's name was never seriously discussed and Harding became a popular compromise candidate and he won the nomination on the 10th ballot.
After the 1920 Republican -- to appease influential Republicans on both coasts -- Harding installed Hoover as his Secretary of Commerce. Hoover's only real contributions during his stint as Commerce Secretary were some important traffic safety (embracing motor vehicle standards, rules of the road, and urban traffic control) innovations. Nevertheless, he sought to expand the Commerce Secretary domain in every possible way. He became known for trying to take over parts of other cabinets so much so that the joke was that Hoover was "the Secretary of Commerce... and Under-Secretary of Everything Else" and Coolidge called him "Wonder-boy."
After the combined Harding-Coolidge administration ended in 1928, Hoover again ran for president. As soon as he was elected in 1928, he set about making the government much bigger. His biggest moves began right after his inauguration and including implementing a wide series of farm programs and a much-criticized huge tariff increase. A self-described "Progressive" and "Reformer," Hoover saw the presidency as a vehicle for improving the conditions of all Americans by regulation and by getting government involved encouraging of volunteerism. Long before entering politics, he had denounced laissez-faire thinking. As Commerce Secretary, he had taken an active pro-regulation stance. As President, he helped push expensive and interventionist tariff and farm subsidy bills through Congress. Hoover also increased taxes and increased the federal budget 50% (for comparison Barack Obama so far has only increased the budget 41%). It's obvious that the real Hoover was nothing like the do-nothing Hoover that Progressive historians have insisted he was.
Just as they did back then, the left (the progressives of today's Democratic Party) is now seeking to blame the current economic crisis on a conspiracy that is an inversion of the actual facts. By the way, back in 1932 FDR and his first VP-to-be called Hoover a "socialist" and promised to use Harding's methods to regain prosperity . . . that is FDR promised to pay down debt; slash taxes; and slash government spending. Instead he actually raised the budget 100% above Hoover's last budget; confiscated the nation's gold and in other ways undermined the recovery so badly that only the nation's entry into World War II nine years later got us out of the depression.
Most Americans have no idea about the facts you've just read and their opinions about government's ability to create jobs in the private sector by increased spending are largely based upon the "Savior myth" of FDR as the man who heroically saved us from the Great Depression.
When it comes to today's problems and today's myths the infamous Obama-car-in-the-ditch myth (blaming all our woes on conservatives and the free markets) tops them all. The truth, however, is:
George W. Bush saw that ACORN, the progressives, big spenders, and Bill Clinton and Barack Obama were deliberately pushing the car (our economy) toward a 500-foot cliff. He jumped into the front seat, grabbed the steering wheel and slammed on the brakes . . . guiding it into the nearest friendly ditch.
To prove this surprising assertion for yourself: you'll need a little education:
groupProfile.asp?grpid=7522http://www.teapartypatriots.org/BlogPostView.aspx?id=0b1f6f49-f530-4d42-965b-7c0252850aa4
That our current president was an ACORN lawyer and community organizer deliberately bankrupting our country as part of Cloward-Piven Strategy using Jimmy Carter's 1977 Community Reinvestment Act (CRA '77) who has the gall to repeatedly tell the car-in-the-ditch story is one of the most shocking hypocrisies imaginable.
The fact that Frances Fox Piven is today still openly calling for bloody revolution and urging the poor and unemployed to "use their anger" and begin the Marxist "revolution" while the lame-stream, mainstream media is accusing the TEA Party of hate-mongering and ignoring Piven is the greatest possible journalistic malfeasance.
The fact that George W. Bush's administration recognized the problem as early as January, 2005 and sought to repeal the horrific CRA '77 laws but the vote was defeated. And that Bush made at least 19 separate speeches on the matter and continued to strive for elimination of CRA '77 right up until finally in July, 2007 (30 months later) when a much weaker law was passed has not been allowed as part of the history of the meltdown even though Obama's Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner in August, 2010 credited Bush with preventing an absolute collapse of our financial system and with preventing total disintegration of the housing market again reflects poorly on the so-called journalistic "profession." The "watchdogs of the Republic" have turned on us . . . this is the biggest story of the last half of the 20th and of the first decade of the 21st Century and naturally, it'll never be reported by the present generation of mainstream journalists . . . .
Tags: the invisible depression, coolidge, fdr, harding, history, hoover, rasmussen reports, taxes, woodrow wilson, business
Rajjpuut's Folly: 'Einstellung Effect,' Revisionism-Blowback, or Sabotage?
Posted by Bob VanDeHey on November 5, 2010 at 4:30pm
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/02/the_clowardpiven_strategy_of_e.html
"If all you have is a hammer, after a while, the whole world starts looking like a nail."
Were Democrats Victimized
by their Own Shenanigans?
Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats find themselves fully flummoxed and feeling flimflammed by the voters they've been working so feverishly and frantically for. It seems that in the 21st Century, government throwing large amounts of money at problems A) is not that popular with the voters and B) doesn't work. Hey, what's that all about?
Rajjpuut used to work as a health educator for Blue Cross and Blue Shield. One of the "studies" that BC and BS did involved a series of actors going around to physicians reportedly suffering severely with fictitious but reasonable symptoms). It was discovered that surgeons wanted to surge into the body with a scalpel; radiologists thought the patients needed to be zapped; internists considered only the wisdom of potions, powders and pills; and chiropractors thought that body alignment was clearly necessary.
In a different study, psychologists found that chess masters routinely either missed or took much longer to discover unique two-move checkmate patterns when their thinking process got tangled up in five- eight- or ten-move combinations leading to far more familiar patterns . . . what's up? In a phrase: it's a scientific principle called the "Einstellung Effect" which is a fancy way to say that when all you have is a hammer, after a while the whole world starts to look an awful lot like a nail. Specifically, the Democrats are "one-trick ponies" who solve problems (or invent problems to solve; or cause problems and then set out to cure them) with only one specialized technique: upping taxes and throwing money at the symptoms of the problem (never the underlying cause which is all too often an initial excess of government involvement).
So our current exacerbation of our fiscal problems under Barack Obama may well be a lesson in the futility of money-throwing and an example of redistributive wealth (as a solution) coming out second-best to the Einstellung Effect, at least that's one possibility, but other than in revisionist history (where the progressives change things to be more to their liking calling, for example, the Italian Fascists an example of the evils of right-wing ideology when anyone doing a modicum of research finds out that the Italian labor unions rose up against the corporate bosses and seized power and then after seizing power across all of Italy, they elected Benito Mussolini to lead the entire nation. Last time anyone checked, labor unions are NOT a right-wing, but rather a left-wing manifestation. The progressives who used to call themselves Liberals are guilty of revisionism at least 100 times a day in major comments found in print, on the air or online.
Hmmmmm, the Einstellung Effect or progressives' own historical revisionism coming back to bite them in the butt, ooh what a "Behar" (as in calling someone "a son of a Behar"). Of course, if you believe as Rajjpuut does that the 100% accurate and real ditch story is this one:
George W. Bush saw Obama, Clinton, ACORN and progressive politicians deliberately pushing the car (the economy) toward a 500-foot cliff (utter financial disaster) and jumped into the front seat, grabbed the wheel and slammed on the brakes, thus initiating a controlled skid that deposited the vehicle into the nearest friendly-looking ditch.
For more on the details of this version of the now famous car and ditch showing that progressives created a bad law under Jimmy Carter (CRA '77 which forced mortgage lenders to make knowingly bad loans) which was first expanded by regulatory fiat under Clinton and then expanded legislatively by Slick Willy three times (twice in 1995; and the steroid-version expansion in 1998); and all the while abused by ACORN to at day's end cause us our worst financial comeuppance since 1929 . . . . Go here for those details and be shocked to find that supposedly 'stupid' G.W. was acutely aware economically and proved himself a hero according to Treasury Sec. Timoth Geithner:
http://rajjpuutsfolly.blogtownhall.com/2010/11/05/avoiding_1994%e2%80%99s_mistakes_crucial_for_conservatives.thtml
So the truth is that former ACORN lawyer and bank brow-beater and shake-down solicitor for the propagation of CRA '77, Barack Obama, actually did 10,000 as much harm to the U.S. economy prior to October 2009 as George Bush ever did . . . and that since taking office in January, 2009, he's done more harm to the U.S. economy than any man since the days of Herbert Hoover and FDR (two infamous progressives) . . . . it all sounds like the Democrats have been hoisted upon their own petard just as they were back in 1933 when FDR came into office and started breaking his campaign vows to, you guessed it, lower taxes and lower spending which is what Warren G. Harding had done in 1920 when he inherited a much fiercer depression from Woodrow Wilson than anything we've seen since: Harding cut taxes 48%; government spending 49%; and paid down the national debt by 30%.
http://www.theproletariatsnews.com/2008/11/special-report-do-we-need-a-new-fdr-to-save-us-from-depression/
http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2010/09/22/1920_the_great_depression_that_wasnt_98679.html
So, is Rajjpuut saying that Democrats deliberately did the country in? As a matter of fact, he's saying that the Progressive ultra-left-wing of the Democratic Party which has co-opted the Democratic Party did just that . . . but let's pretend you consider such utterances to be "conspiracy theory" nonsense . . . well, given the facts as they stand you can instead call them extraordinarily INEPT instead and we'll both be happy.
Tags: bush hero car in ditch, cra '77, cloward-piven, coolidge, democrats, einstellung effect, fdr, hoover, strategy, bush
Rajjpuut's Folly: Crocodile Tears, Then Dismemberment Part V
Posted by Bob VanDeHey on September 14, 2010 at 12:16am
". . . and then there's welfare . . . . Obamacare created 388 brand new government agencies or offices and a whole new welfare culture so that now the whole mess (national debt; unfunded liabilities (in Medicare, Social Security and the federal side of Medicaid), Obamacare, Medicaid funding by the states; and welfare + interest will amount to roughly a $225 TRillion obligation. The Gross Domestic Product of the whole world is only about $56 Trillion, roughly one fourth of the mountain of debt and obligations we're now facing. How can this be handled without impoverishing our children and grandchildren? Without reducing the nation to 4th world status?" Rajjpuut
Crocodile Tears of the Left
Flood America with Corruption
as the "BIG LIE" Dominates
Part V: Victim #5, The American Dream
Loyal readers are advised to skip ahead as we give a brief review. In this blog series, we've been exposing the self-described "victimhood" of progressives at the hands of their evil, racist, etc. conservative oppressors and showing you where the real victimhood is . . . .
http://rajjpuutsfolly.blogtownhall.com/2010/09/04/first_crocodile_tears,_then_dismemberment_part_i.thtml
The highlight of part I of this blog series (the link immediately above), and it was difficult to pick a single highlight with "TRUTH" the victim, was this well-documented statement:
Using the same Cloward-Piven** strategy that DELIBERATELY created the bankruptcy of New York City earlier between 1967 and 1975 by deliberately overloading the welfare rolls . . . beginning especially after 1992, ACORN, OBAMA, First ACORN PRESIDENT Bill Clinton, and oodles of progressives (98% of them Democrats) DELIBERATELY were pushing the car toward a 500-foot cliff. George W. Bush jumped in and grabbed the steering wheel and hit the brakes. Bush was able to create a controlled-skid and guide the car to rest in a friendly-looking ditch!
The fact that such a statement is made NOW, 44 years after the chain of events began producing that statement is something that every American ought to be aware of, just as every American ought to be aware of the identities of Saul Alinsky, Richard Cloward and Frances Piven and be able to articulate what Cloward-Piven strategy is . . . the fact that most Americans are totally ignorant of these things means someone hasn't been doing their job. In Part II the victim was journalistic integrity . . . .
http://rajjpuutsfolly.blogtownhall.com/2010/09/05/first_crocodile_tears,_then_dismemberment___part_ii.thtml
In Part III of the series we examined how the false victimhood of the progressives (we must "progress" beyond the outdated and deeply flawed U.S. Constitution) has created another real victim: "Responsibility" in the guise of the rising numbers of single-mother-families (a problem obviously created by everybody else's sexism, according to feminists). As the irresponsible notion of deliberately choosing a single-parent family drags down all of society (see this link) destroys the American family and creates a new impoverished class in the country . . . .
http://rajjpuutsfolly.blogtownhall.com/2010/09/06/first_crocodile_tears,_then_dismemberment___part_iii.thtml
Economics is a very simple area that the left has sought to hijack with the creation of their own branch of economic science called Keynesian economics. Keynesian economics only sort of explains what happens in Socialist and Totalitarian regimes, that's why there's about 80 different schools of Keynesian economics out there. Rajjpuut gives the basics of real (Classical) economics which NOT surprisingly explains everything that happens in any type of political system pretty much perfectly. Classical economics is not the same as Obamanomics, not at all. Taxing and spending and government interference boondoggles (GIBs) and government spending boondoggles and the deficits and debt they create are the antithesis of common-sense classical economics as we saw in our 4th installment . . . .
http://teapartypatriots.org/BlogPostView.aspx?id=15869898-cbf1-4968-8dbc-3d0550f77bbd
And while the left and their media sycophants are crying, "racists, sexists, bigots, etc. all day long proving themselves always the long-suffering victims and conservative Americans always the eternal oppressors, the fifth REAL victim of all these progressive-victim tales is:
Victim #5: The American Dream
The American Dream is a simple, beautiful thing . . . from the start people came here to find freedom from the heavy hand of big government they'd known in other lands. They continued to come here during the last 233 years because freedom was incarnated in the rule of law, the Constitution of the United States (itself based upon the Declaration of Independence) knowing that the Republic created upon America's shores was a Meritocracy, that every man or woman who came here would find no real obstacles to their American Dream, to build a good life and open to all of them was the opportunity to leave their children a lot better off then they themselves started out. Thanks to a Century of Progressivism, the American Dream is on the endangered list . . . .
The American Dream is endangered because the very core principles of this nation have been set aside for far too long now. Thrift; industry; equality before the law; capitalism; freedom itself; integrity; and small, non-interfering government that lived by these principles
http://www.econlib.org/library/Essays/rdPncl1.html
http://fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson/#0.1_L2
http://fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson/
has all but disappeared from the American scene. The meritocracy has virtually vanished. Thrift has been replaced by personal, corporate and particularly government excesses and debt creation. Industry? Why? 48% of the people pay no taxes, the industrious and the job creators are taxed relentlessly as their 52% supports all the rest of society, most shamelessly, a bloated bureaucracy of unionized government workers who almost can't be fired no matter how poorly they perform.
Repeatedly hard-working, hard-studying men and women who seek to advance themselves by entering important civil-service fields like the fire-department, police-department and first-responder medical crews find that it does no good to ace the test . . . because affirmative-action critics will steal the positions the hard-working/hard-studying folks actually earned; "capitalism" has become a dirty word and PROFIT has become the dirtiest of vile words as freedom itself has been perverted in a thousand ways . . . most often by abusing the once honored word "reform."
Citizens are becoming aware that the word "reform" attached to a bill doesn't mean anything is ever improved, it only means that government is expanding, spending is going up and taxes too . . . and the last time Obama, Pelosi and Reid showed integrity . . . . well, it hasn't happened in Rajjpuut's lifetime. Our ever expanding, ever spending, ever interfering government is the problem and the political class (the politicians and bureaucrats within the government) is the only group who benefits while the rest of us suffer. The biggest losers, the biggest victims? Our children and grandchildren.
Our $14 TRillion national debt is multiplying geometrically as this is being written. But that's small potatoes. Since 1935 for Social Security and 1965 for Medicare and the federal side of Medicaid, the progressives have established these three entitlement programs as "pay as you go, set-aside" entities . . . but of course, the progressives in congress have seen to it that we never pay as we go, we never set aside the money collected for these purposes . . . the result? We now own $115 Trillion in unfunded liabilities (promises made to our people – often our aged) that we have not one single dollar set aside to pay off these promises.
On top of that as all three of these unfunded liabilities grow . . . the new Obamacare program will between 2019 and 2024 bankrupt every state in the union as they force states to fund the greater role for Medicaid required by that law. And then there's welfare . . . . Obamacare created 388 brand new government agencies or offices and a whole new welfare culture so that now the whole mess (national debt; unfunded liabilities (in Medicare, Social Security and the federal side of Medicaid), Obamacare, Medicaid funding by the states; and welfare + interest will amount to roughly a $225 TRillion obligation. The Gross Domestic Product of the whole world is only about $56 Trillion, roughly one fourth of the mountain of debt and obligations we're now facing. How can this be handled without impoverishing our children and grandchildren? Without reducing the nation to 4th world status? Can it be done?
Yes, it can and it can be done simply (but definitely NOT EASILY and definitely NOT QUICKLY). Barack Obama is committing the country to the path that Republican Progressive Herbert Hoover and Democratic Progressive Franklin Roosevelt took which turned a simple panic into first a depression (under Hoover) and then a Great Depression (under Roosevelt) that lasted over twelve years. The strange thing is that Roosevelt ran against the big government, big spending philosophies of Hoover and promised to revert to the strategies of Harding and Coolidge (cutting taxes by 47% and taxes by 49% and paying down 30% of the national debt) and then, of course, FDR pulled a Barack Obama on the country doing such things as confiscating the people's gold (forced) at $20.76 per ounce and then devaluing the paper dollars he'd given them to $35 per ounce – stealing almost 70% of the value of the gold he'd confiscated.
The reason he won the election in 1932? Hoover was totally unpopular and FDR was promising common sense solutions that the people knew worked because they'd seen them work in making the "Invisible Depression" of 1920-21, well "invisible" . . . .
http://www.thefreemanonline.org/featured/the-depression-youve-never-heard-of-1920-1921/
One proviso, our current situation and our current direction is much worse than what Harding faced taking over from progressive Democrat Woodrow Wilson . . . so how tough could things be? Imagine elimination of Obamacare; government spending reduced 60%; taxes reduced the same 60%; and a commitment to reduce the national debt by 12% per year . . . does that sound austere to you?
Then consider this, let's say, the problem with the economy and the national debt is wiped out in five years . . . NICE! Not so fast! Remember the $225 TRillion total we mentioned? Well that's taken care of perhaps $16 TRillion and all the states are meanwhile going bankrupt and the federal government as well because of state and federal government pensions going through the roof to our unionized state and federal employees . . .
So we're talking about letting states fail (go bankrupt) and state and federal workers getting their contracts renegotiated markedly downward and we're talking about our wonderful union employees "pulling a Greece" and holding the country hostage with street violence . . . simple is one thing, easy solutions are yet another . . . .
Next Time: First Crocodile Tears, then Dismemberment Part VI
Tags: -, american, coolidge, debt", depression", dream", fdr, great, hoover, invisible
Rajjpuut's Folly: Myth vs. Truth, Not Knowing History, We're Poised to Repeat
Posted by Bob VanDeHey on August 10, 2010 at 9:37am
http://www.swifteconomics.com/2009/08/03/if-only-barack-hoover-obama-was-barack-harding-obama/
Boobus Americanus Understanding Little
Believes History's Biggest Lies,
Do We Need a Negative Stimulus Package?
The great cynical journalist H.L. Mencken often talked about that utterly strange creature he called "Boobus Americanus." Mencken would be greatly heartened to know that in this era of "endangered species" Boobus Americanus has multiplied twenty-fold thanks to cross-breeding with Couch-us Potat-us Americanus and Sitcomus Addictus. Here are four great myths from the 20th Century spread by Progressive historians ("we must progress beyond the outdated ill-conceived Constitution") and Progressive politicians . . . myths that Boobus Americanus believes with all his heart and soul.
I. Progressive Woodrow Wilson was one of our greatest presidents
II. Warren G. Harding was one of the worst presidents and a crook
III. Herbert Hoover, who did nothing to head off the Great Depression, was a conservative who "fiddled like Nero while Rome burned."
IV. Progressive Franklin Delano Roosevelt was our greatest president and he saved us from the Great Depression.
Here are the facts:
A. Democrat Progressive Woodrow Wilson was, among other failings, a racist who premiered D.W. Griffiths' racist classic "Birth of a Nation" in the White House and instigated segregation in government hiring from the White House. He was also our first true tax-and-spend President. He left behind a much worse recession than G.W. Bush did. He also wrote a history of America that called into question virtually everything noble about the country and the founding fathers. He was definitely a progressive and tried to change history to move things more along the progressive path with much greater government size and control of our lives. As Wilson's last year, 1920, ticked away the economic situation was grim . . . unemployment had jumped from 4% to 12% and GDP dipped 17%. It would get worse.
B. Things got so bad that new president Warren G. Harding's Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover (falsely characterized as a do-nothing laissez-faire conservative) urged Harding to consider a huge array of interventions in order to turn the economy around. Harding ignored Hoover and calmly paid down the national debt by 33%.
Harding facing a GDP drop of about 25% because of Wilson's policies, also cut taxes and spending both between 45%-49% and the recesssion became known as the "Invisible Depression" because it ended within 15 months. Indeed within six months signs of recovery were already visible. In 1922, unemployment was back to 6.7% and had dropped to 2.4% by 1923. His vice president Calvin Coolidge continued Harding's policies and the resulting "Roaring 20's" was the single most prosperous decade in American history as the standard of living rose dramatically. For the first time Americans in large numbers owned automobiles, indoor plumbing, electric lighting, and appliances like the ice box and radio and took yearly vacations. The Teapot Dome scandal that's been blamed on Harding by the Progressive historians occurred after his death and was created by fraudulent dealings initiated by his Secretary of the Interior Albert Fall.
C. Hoover, who replaced Coolidge in 1928, was a Republican Progressive and up until FDR was the most interfering president in American History. Almost as soon as he took office he abandoned the business friendly policies of Harding and Coolidge and jumped in to interfere in agriculture and business. To be specific:
Hoover . . . .
1) increased taxes on top wage earners from 25% to 63%
2) increased government spending by 47%
3) ran a deficit of 4.5% of GDP
4) against the wishes of over 1000 economists, he signed the Smoot-Hawley Tariff, effectively shutting down international trade
5) established the Reconstruction Finance Corporation to make loans to the state governments
6) appropriated money for public works construction (Hoover Dam among others)
7) met with major industry leaders and put significant pressure on them to maintain wages at current levels, despite the amount of money in the economy falling by one-third. This led, predictably, to massive unemployment thanks to those first wage controls in American history.
8) the myth or misconception of Hoover's non-interference gets so absurd it's almost unbelievable. The truth is diametrically opposed to that myth, for example, during the 1932 campaign, Franklin Roosevelt's first vice president, John Garner, accused Herbert Hoover of "leading the country down the path of socialism." Furthermore, FDR brain-truster, Rexford Tugwell admitted that, "most of what (Hoover) began would be taken over by Roosevelt and renamed the "New Deal."
D. Progressive Democrat Franklin Delano Roosevelt campaigned against virtually everything Hoover did. He promised to return to the policies of Harding and Coolidge (low taxes, low spending and non-interference), but once elected continued Hardings policies with a vengeance. Higher taxes, much higher spending. He also confiscated gold and then soon changed the exchange rate from $21.76 per ounce of gold to $35 per ounce, effectively robbing all savers and investors of 61% of the value of their holdings. FDR made even Hoover's interference look like penny-ante stuff . . . among other things he created 40 brand new federal agencies. Far from saving the country from the depression, he and his policies turned a little 'd' depression into the Great Depression which the rest of the world suffering a little 'd' depression avoided. In fact, except for the outbreak of World War II, almost nine years after he was first elected, the Great Depression showed no signs of ceasing under FDR.
E. Just for comparison, Barack Obama is making Hoover and Roosevelt both look like pikers. Imagine this, in just one law (Obamacare), Obama has created more than 385 brand new government agencies about ten times what FDR did in 12+ years . . . in just one law. And, of course, like Hoover and FDR, Obama is raising taxes, raising spending, raising deficits, and raising the national debt while doing nothing about unemployment.
So what's to be learned now that real history's been unearthed? Well, the very first time (under Hoover and FDR) that government involved itself seriously in intervening to stop an economic downturn . . . just happens to coincide with the onset of the greatest downturn of all . . . almost as if government interference made things much worse, do you think? In comparison Harding 12 years earlier did what any sensible family or business would do in hard times . . . took in the belt a few extra notches. According to the Cato Institute:
"Harding inherited (Woodrow) Wilson's mess—in particular, a post–World War I depression that was almost as severe, from peak to trough, as the Great Contraction from 1929 to 1933 that FDR would later inherit. The estimated gross national product plunged 24 percent from $91.5 billion in 1920 to $69.6 billion in 1921. The number of unemployed people jumped from 2.1 million to 4.9 million."
So what did Harding do? He cut government spending from $6.3 billion in 1920, to $5 billion in 1921, and then again to $3.2 billion in 1922. This would amount to a negative stimulus package! Income taxes were left as is and corporate taxes were cut. There was no push for new regulations and the Federal Reserve did nothing.
What was the result of Harding's negative stimulus package? By 1922, unemployment was down to 6.7% and the Roaring Twenties had begun. The economy set new production records year after year until the infamous Black Tuesday on October 29th, 1929 created by Hoover's profligate policies.
Of course the Progressive historians have altered the facts significantly and made FDR a hero and Harding a villain. And befuddled by their own histories, they've made all the wrong conclusions over and over and over again and the country enamored of the false-legacy of FDR has eagerly joined them . . . .
Ya'll live long, strong and ornery,
My friend Tish Gance forwarded me the following which explains perfectly how false history comes to dominate our reality . . . .
Monkeys --
Start with a cage containing five monkeys. Inside the cage, hang a banana on a string
and place a set of stairs under it.
Before long, a monkey will go to the stairs and start to climb towards the banana.
As soon as he touches the stairs, spray all the other monkeys with cold water.
After a while another monkey makes the attempt with same result, all the other monkeys are sprayed with cold water.
Pretty soon when another Monkey tries to climb the stairs, the other monkeys will try to prevent it.
Now, put the cold water away. Remove one monkey from the cage and replace it with a new one.
The new monkey sees the banana and wants to climb the stairs.
To his shock, all of the other monkeys beat the snot out of him. After another attempt and attack,
he knows that if he tries to climb the stairs he will be assaulted.
Next, remove another of the original five monkeys and replace it with a new one.
The newcomer goes to the stairs and is attacked.
The previous newcomer takes part in the punishment with enthusiasm.
Likewise, replace a third original monkey with a new one, then a fourth, then the fifth.
Every time the newest monkey takes to the stairs he is attacked.
Most of the monkeys that are beating him up have no idea why they were not permitted to climb the stairs
OR even why they are participating in the beating of the newest monkey. Finally, after replacing all of the
original monkeys, none of the remaining monkeys have ever been sprayed with cold water.
Nevertheless, no monkey ever again approaches the stairs to try for the banana.
Because as far as they know, that is the way it has always been done around here.
And that, my fellow monkeys, is how Congress operates -
And precisely why we need to REPLACE all the original monkeys this November
Tags: great depression, coolidge, fdr, harding, hoover, invisible depression, rajjpuut, roosevelt, conservatives, government interference

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Around the world, upper lips are twitching in anticipation of Movember, when thousands of moustaches will be grown in the name of men's health. MiNDFOOD reports.
For those who love a clean-shaven man, it may be wise to stay inside over the coming month. By the end of next week the first hairy hints of handlebars will be detected sprouting from thousands of men's upper lips – from thin and wispy to bushy and big – and by the end of November millions of dollars will have been raised around the world by men growing moustaches.
First grown in Australia in 2003, far from being a fashion statement, Movember moustaches are designed to spark a conversation.
One of the biggest hurdles men face in regards to their health is a reluctance to discuss the health issues they face. Unlike women's health issues, funding, understanding and awareness is significantly lacking when it comes to men's health, contributing to the fact that men die on average five to six years younger than women. Not only this, but the suicide rate is four times higher for men than it is for women, and more than five men die prematurely each hour from potentially preventable illnesses.
Movember aims to increase men's awareness on facts such as these, educate them on important health issues, as well as raise funds for research and education specifically relating to prostate cancer and depression.
"The moustache has and continues to be a great catalyst for change," explains Adam Garone, one of the original 'Mo Bros'.
Although growing a mo is restricted to the men among us, Movember encourages women to get involved too, asking 'Mo Sistas' to register their support online, champion their partner throughout the month, and help spread the men's health message.
Last year, over 130,000 male and female Australians joined the fight for men's health and either grew a mo, or supported their partner in doing so. The biggest year in Movember's history, Australians contributed AU$25 million to the AU$72 million raised worldwide.
This year, event organisers hope to do even more, whilst continuing to inspire men to speak out about their health concerns.
But until the inevitable ritual that is the collective shaving of all mos at the end of November, several weeks of uncomfortable and sometimes awkward growth lie ahead. It could, after all, take a few months before a chevron worthy of Tom Selleck appears on your face.
Tim Green, Principal Architect at Sydney-based software company Portland Risk, and a seasoned participant in Movember, describes the trepidation he felt taking part in the event for the first time.
"There is self doubt, definitely. 'Will it actually grow? How will it look? Will people take me seriously at meetings? Will my wife still fancy me? Will my kids cry?'" Green says. However, all these concerns fell by the wayside. "A mo is a good ice breaker at business meetings; my wife tolerates it as it is for a good cause; and the kids cry the same amount with or without the mo!" he laughs.
Green does, however, admit that it can be a scary prospect going out in public for the first time. But perhaps the biggest concern of all is what style to grow?
For more information and to take part in Movember visit movember.com.
Throughout November, Bread & Butter Skincare will be donating $3 to Movember for every men's skincare kit purchased online in New Zealand. For your chance to win one these kits, including a face cleanser, shave gel, face and body moisturisers designed especially for men, click here.


text:
define(
	 ({
		commonMapControls: {
			common: {
				settings: "Configurações",
				openDefault: "Abrir por defeito"
			},
			overview: {
				basemapGalleryBtnLabel: "Mapa Base",
				expandFactorLabel: "Expandir Fator",
				expandFactorPopover: "O rácio entre o tamanho do mapa de vista geral e o retângulo de extensão exibido no mapa de vista geral. O valor por defeito é 2, o que significa que o mapa de vista geral terá pelo menos duas vezes menos o tamanhodo retângulo de extensão."
			}
		}
	})
);

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


Furniture shops are not very difficult to select. First you will have to check on the fashion of your private home, before you should buy any furniture. This may show you how to make some easy choices about the furniture you have to select, so that it blends with the architecture of the house.
Next you'll have to make a finances for the form of furniture that it would be best to buy. You is likely to be transferring right into a new house, and you will want new furniture. So accordingly you possibly can plan the budget. You don't have to purchase all of it at the same time. You possibly can select the furniture from the shop and purchase it in over a couple of months should you must.
Earlier than buying or deciding on a furnishings retailer, you are able to do some analysis on the Web, about all of the stores in your area. You may then examine prices, and also the services of each store earlier than selecting one. Many of the reputed stores can even have web sites that you could browse through.
Good furniture stores will have pictures and catalogues of all of the furnishings they have. If you want to place an order on-line, first call and check if the corporate is genuine. You also have to ensure that the websites are secure, in order that your credit card payment is secure, and no identity theft can happen.
In case you are choosing a good furniture store, you must also ensure that they've a staff that will help you with the installation. Some furniture sets should be set up with professionals, and thus the precaution. It is usually smart to choose a eclectic furniture stores retailer that could be very near the world you live in.
You will also wish to select a furnishings retailer that has all types of furniture. This will permit to make the alternatives, and also to be able to pick from an identical vary of style, in relation to the furniture. See to it that the shop could be very buyer friendly, and offers you all of the companies that you just need.
When you've got busy schedules, it does not matter, as most furniture stores are open on all days of the week. In a worst-case situation, you can also order for the furnishings on-line from a very good on-line furnishings store. The Web has made life easier for all of us, and you solely have to order the furniture from the consolation of your home.
Whether or not it is establishing an office or a house, most furnishings retailers you choose will have all the mandatory furniture and also accessories available for you. Additionally, you will should go to a retailer if you're particularly want to set up your property in a selected style. Some shops is not going to have the type of furniture you are on the lookout for, so it's best to plan first and then go furnishings shopping.


Launched in 2010, BORN developed the brand proposition and designed and built the website for this UK telecoms company specialising in the niche market of tough, rugged mobile phones. TUFF Phones quickly topped the SERPs for a number of highly competitive search terms and has gone from strength to strength in the market place. We continue to work closely with TUFF Phones, providing a comprehensive SEO campaign, SEM, direct marketing and affiliate marketing strategies which have helped to ensure the company's growth.
BORN now manage all social media accounts, PR and are responsible for the creation of all print media, advertising collateral and packaging.
TUFF Phones utilises the world's most trusted and widely-used e-commerce platform, Magento. This robust, open source platform allows flexible customisation of the user's e-commerce experience.


text:
Student Scientist Named Semifinalist
CHS senior Peter C. was recently named a semifinalist in the Intel Science Talent Search (Intel STS), America's oldest and most prestigious science research competition for high school seniors. Over 1,700 students entered the competition from across the U.S., District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and four overseas schools. Through this contest, students are able to present their original research to nationally recognized professional scientists.
Peter entered his research project entitled Probing Interactions of Molecular Solutes in Ionic Liquids. He summarized the purpose of his project.
"The project dealt with room temperature ionic liquids (RTILs), liquids which hold much promise due their customizability. By determining whether the RTIL experiences attraction or repulsion with given molecular solutes, the RTIL's structure was examined. This was accomplished by measuring the volume of each molecule-RTIL mixture under various temperatures and concentrations of the molecular solutes. The experiment was significant because knowledge of the RTIL's structure is crucial to unlocking their potential."
Peter's research earned him a place as one of 300 semifinalists, one of only 20 from Texas. As a semifinalist, he and Coppell High School will each receive $1,000, which CHS will contribute to excellence in education in the fields of science, math and engineering.
The Intel STS encourages talented U.S. high school seniors to pursue independent research in science, math, engineering, and medicine. Since the contest began in 1942, more than 130,000 students from high schools in all 50 states and territories have completed independent science research projects and submitted entries. Alumni of the Intel STS include holders of more than 100 of the world's most coveted science and math honors.
For more information about the Intel Science Talent Search, visit http://www.societyforscience.org/sts.


Were you active in the military between 2003-2015?
Design problems with military earplugs manufactured by 3M Company may have left service members with inadequate ear protection against loud explosions and battlefield noise, resulting in permanent hearing damage.
Call 1-800-522-0102 to find out if you have a military hearing loss claim.
The product liability lawyers at Saiontz & Kirk, P.A. are reviewing earplug class action lawsuits and military hearing loss claims for individuals who were provided 3M Combat Arms Earplugs, Version 2 (CAEv2) during service.
In July 2018, the U.S. Department of Justice announced that a $9.1 million settlement was reached with 3M Company, resolving allegations that it knowingly sold defective dual-end earplugs to the military, without disclosing that design defects may result in ineffective protection.
Between 2003 and late 2015, nearly every deployed soldier or military service member was issued CAEv2. However, 3M Company withheld important information about design defects, and failed to provide adequate warnings or instructions for users.
As a result of the apparent decision to place the desire for profits before the safety of U.S. military service members, financial compensation and benefits may be available through a 3M earplug settlement for veterans left with irreversible hearing damage.
To find out whether you or a loved one have a case, request a free consultation and case evaluation.
Did You Receive Defective 3M Military Earplugs?
3M Combat Arms Earplugs, Version 2 (CAEv2) are dual-ended, or reversible, featuring one end that is yellow and another that is olive/dark green.
Dark End Inserted: With the olive green or dark end in, the earplugs are designed to be "closed" or "fully blocked", preventing all sound like a traditional earplug.
Yellow End Inserted: With the yellow side in, the earplugs are supposed to provide non-linear, or selective attenuation. This is supposed to reduces loud impulse sounds, such as battlefield explosions and artillery fire, while allowing users to hear quieter noises, such as spoken commands.
3M Company marketed Combat Arms as a "pre-molded triple flange design" that fit most ear canals. However, evidence now indicates that the company knew the earplugs contained a design defect, as they were too short for proper insertion and tend to gradually move out of place, which renders them ineffective. This information was not provided to the U.S. Government or to military personnel.
A defective earplug design caused Combat Arms/CAEv2 to slowly loosen over time, leaving military users at risk of permanent hearing damage.
A surprisingly large number of military service members have filed hearing disability claims or been left with long-term hearing damage after they were issued and used 3M Combat Arms earplugs during training and deployment.
In addition to military disability or service benefits, substantial financial compensation may be available from the manufacturer of these defective earplugs for hearing loss after military service.
Over the course of more than 40 years, our clients have collected more than $1 billion of compensation in cases for product liability, medical malpractice and other personal injury lawsuits.
All 3M defective earplug lawsuits will be handled by our attorneys on a contingency fee basis, which means that there are never any out-of-pocket expenses to hire our law firm and we only receive a fee if compensation is secured for our client.
Protect your family and find out if you or a loved one may be eligible for an earplug hearing loss settlement. Request a free consultation and case evaluation.
CONTACT OUR 3M EARPLUG LAWYERS No Fees or Expenses Unless a Recovery is Obtained.


text:
As Early Elections Loom, Netanyahu's Standing in Polls Is Stronger Than Ever
If elections were held today, according to the latest Haaretz-Dialog poll, Benjamin Netanyahu would have no trouble forming his third government. And that poll was conducted before his appearance this week at the UN.
Yossi Verter
Get email notification for articles from Yossi Verter Follow
The fate of the 2013 state budget will be decided in the weeks ahead. If the budget is submitted to the cabinet and Knesset, and it is approved, the parliamentary elections will take place as scheduled, in about 13 months. If the budget is not submitted for discussion or it is not approved, the elections will likely be moved up to this winter.
Iran, Foe or Election Opportunity for Bibi?
At UN, Netanyahu Speaks to Israel
Coalition Girding for Early Election
Knesset Speaker Calls for Early Elections
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says he is striving with all his might for the first option: for a budget to be approved and for the government to serve out its full legal term. But more and more ministers in Likud believe that he is either bluffing or mistaken or both. That he would prefer to make do with the government serving a four-year term - an impressive and unexpected achievement, by all accounts - and then go to the ballot box next February or March. That is, before the budget and the hammer blows it will be dealt become a biting reality, before Ehud Olmert is freed from his legal shackles and before the nation gets fed up with Netanyahu and Likud. Indeed, before the trickle becomes a flood.
The results appearing on these pages from this week's Haaretz- Dialog survey, conducted under the supervision of Prof. Camil Fuchs of Tel Aviv University, reflect an approach that is the opposite to that apparently espoused by Netanyahu (on the assumption that the premier is really saying what he thinks and that he thinks what he says).
Furthermore, as compared to poll conducted two months ago, held in the shadow of the tax increases and the economic belt-tightening, the new one shows that Netanyahu has gained in popularity, and that the gap between Likud and Labor has increased from four to eight projected Knesset seats (i.e., to 28 and to 20 seats, respectively). The Likud-rightist-Haredi bloc has also increased its strength - to 66 Knesset seats, if the election were to be held today.
The center-left bloc, including Ehud Barak's Atzmaut party - which, again, according to this poll, gets enough votes to pass the threshhold to enter the Knesset - has only 54 seats'-worth of support. If the elections were held today, Netanyahu would have no trouble forming his third government. All he would have to do is beckon with his finger and choose anew among the potential partners: logical or less logical ones, moderates or extremists, social-democrats or capitalists, Haredim or secular. It's not hard to guess whom he would choose.
As the Jewish new year begins, during which there will an election campaign in Israel one way or the other, the public is frightened at the possibility of a looming war between Israel and Iran. As was reported in these pages yesterday, half the country's citizens "fear" or "greatly fear" for Israel's continued existence in the event of a war that is liable to escalate into a full-scale regional conflict.
That figure is both dramatic and surprising. After all, our leaders tell us repeatedly that Israel is the strongest country in the Middle East, has the finest army and the most effective air force, and that its depots, bunkers and computers contain extremely powerful weapons and jaw-dropping technological and electronic means of warfare. Nevertheless, large sections of the public fear that the state will cease to exist in the coming year.
Truth and lies
It's interesting to look into the cause of this trepidation. Is it the threats from Tehran, which have escalated in the past few weeks? Or the nonstop domestic chatter of the militant Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak on the one hand, and of opponents of an Israeli attack, who foresee a catastrophic effect, on the other hand? In any event, the survey carries a pessimistic bottom line for the coming year: We are a-f-r-a-i-d.
The prevailing existential malaise is not affecting Netanyahu's unassailable status as the only relevant candidate for prime minister. Despite all his blunders and the criticism leveled at him - not always fairly - he is undoubtedly an electoral asset for Likud. On the question, asked in this week's Haaretz-Dialog poll, of who is best suited to be premier, he vanquishes all his rivals: Shelly Yacimovich, Shaul Mofaz, Avigdor Lieberman and Ehud Barak. In fact, Netanyahu has more support than the other four party leaders combined (35 percent to 34 percent).
Besides him, Yacimovich is the only one who manages to achieve two-digit backing in the poll. A former journalist and an outstanding MK who has never held an executive position and who consistently ignores political-security issues - she easily trumps Mr. Security and former Prime Minister Barak, Mr. Security and former Chief of Staff Mofaz, and Mr. Lieberman. Those three men have a cumulative 100 years of service in governmental, military and security posts, of sitting around the security-cabinet table, of making life-and-death decisions and managing complex systems. But a large swath of the public is looking for someone else.
There is something of a correlation between the 20 seats predicted in the poll for the Labor Party if elections were held today, and the next question asked in the survey: Which issue will most affect people's decisions about whom to vote for - the Iranian threat, the peace process or the social-economic situation? A large majority of the respondents said it will be the social-economic issue. That explains Labor's strength under Yacimovich, but there is still something misleading about this unequivocal response. If this truly reflected the situation, Labor would get more seats than Likud, or at least it would narrow the gap between them. Previous elections have demonstrated that in polls, people tend to say that their vote will be decided by economic issues, but in practice their choice is almost always a derivative of the political-security "situation."
True, something has changed. The summer of 2011 saw an authentic mass social protest movement (one day even Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz will have to admit that ), and there is no doubt that it will influence future voting patterns. But this country is still not in that coveted place where people actually vote on issues related to economics, education or health care; the voters may think that they do, but on election day they behave differently. As Shimon Peres put it after losing in the 1996 elections, even though the polls showed him winning, "In Israel, people tell the truth in polls and lie in the voting booth."
Political tailspin
This week's Haaretz-Dialog survey was conducted before Yom Kippur, before President Barack Obama and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke at the United Nations, and of course before Prime Minister Netanyahu's scheduled address at the UN, which was to take place late yesterday, after press time. There is no doubt that if the poll had been conducted at the beginning of next week, Netanyahu's popularity would have soared sky-high. There is nothing like a civilized and aggressive Zionist speech, delivered in excellent English and in a hostile arena, to fill the nation's heart with pride. A post-speech survey would surely have catapulted Netanyahu's suitability-as-premier rating and also his approval rating as prime minister, which in any case show a marked improvement this time, over the last survey.
At present, Netanyahu has an approval rating of 38 percent, while 53 percent disapprove of his performance as prime minister. In the previous Haaretz survey, of July 31, the figures were catastrophic: 31 percent vs. 60 percent - a drop of 29 percent. Presently he is only at a 15 percent "minus." The decline has been curbed.
A few more comments are in order about the survey and its implications for the political scene, ahead of the Knesset's winter session, which begins on October 15. Yair Lapid continues to falter. The current poll gives him only eight Knesset seats, as compared with 16 seats on July 9, following the breakdown of the cooperation between Likud and Kadima due to disagreement over the Tal Law concerning army service for the ultra-Orthodox. Lapid has been having a hard time finding an agenda since then. He continues to make his views known in the media and had a warmly supportive holiday-eve interview in the mass-circulation newspaper in which he is also a columnist. Either Lapid will reprise his late father's limited electoral achievement in the elder Lapid's first try as head of now-defunct Shinui party - six seats - or the polls do not correctly identify the younger Lapid's voting public and he will be the surprise of the next elections.
As soon as Netanyahu declares new elections, Kadima will split into right, left and center, and Tzipi Livni will end her time-out and announce her return to the political arena. That arena will then be severely shaken, for only Livni is capable of taking away votes from Yacimovich and Lapid and also from Meretz, and of pulling the carpet out from under Mofaz. In the current Haaretz-Dialog survey, 17 percent of the respondents, representing what would amount to 20 Knesset seats, said they would "consider" voting for a party headed by Livni. Still, we should not overestimate that response. It's a general, nonbinding statement.
A private survey commissioned some two weeks ago by a political figure examined the electoral ramifications of a situation in which Livni joins up with Yacimovich and is given the No. 2 slot on the Labor Party list. That survey gives Labor, led by the two ladies, 30 seats. If we add Lapid, Kadima under Mofaz, Atzmaut under Barak, Meretz under Zahava Gal-On and the 10 or 11 seats the Arab parties traditionally get - we can envision the rise of a center-left bloc that is able to prevent the formation of a Likud-led government. Well, maybe we can imagine that - but hell will freeze over before Livni joins up with Yacmovich.
The prospect of Ehud Olmert running for prime minister in an election campaign that could be launched next month, or at the beginning of November, is practically nonexistent. But let's consider this scenario: Say the Knesset is dissolved at the end of October, with elections set for mid-February 2013, and Olmert announces his return. At the same time, the state prosecution files an appeal to the Supreme Court against his acquittal in the so-called Talansky "envelopes" affair. A party under his leadership wins as many or almost as many seats as Likud. In the coalition negotiations that Olmert and Netanyahu conduct in parallel, Olmert comes up with enough support to garner 61 Knesset seats and is called upon to form a government by President Peres. Olmert's second government is sworn in at the beginning of April.
Then, let's say, the Supreme Court accepts the state's appeal in the Talansky case, one month after that, and say that Olmert is convicted in that affair and is sentenced to a prison term or to public service and is forced to resign as prime minister. Again. The country goes into a tremendous political tailspin and a constitutional crisis. And we haven't even mentioned the Holyland apartment complex case, for which Olmert is now on trial.
Who needs all this, for heaven's sake?
Benjamin Netanyahu speaking during a press conference in Jerusalem, Sept. 11, 2012.Credit: AP