Ezra Klein is trying his best to not get it

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/07/why_are_corporations_sitting_o.html

Pressed on the subject, Donahue allowed that fears of further market turmoil and insufficient consumer demand were also players in business decisions. At this point, Pfeffer offered a useful addition: Businesses are herd animals, he said. They tend to spend all at once and hoard all at once. So the fact that many of them are hoarding now is convincing the rest of them to hoard now, and the question is how you break that cycle so a few major players step out and invest and make their competitors feel like they'd be missing out if they didn't do the same. But that sort of change requires some positive shock -- great jobs data, say -- and it's not clear where that'll come from.

I laughed when I read his -- I think Klein is pretty sure where he thinks it should come from -- government spending, another stimulus, "relief". But I will give Klein the benefit of the doubt and assume he's really perplexed.

It will come from government changing direction, eliminating capital gains taxes, letting the business community know that no more drastic changes are in the planning, so that businesses don't have to worry about increases in the cost of doing business. It will come from a government which ends corporate welfare/protection and announces a change in policy which will allow the free market to work in open competition without government interference. This would shock businesses into hiring and expanding, and it would bring in huge amounts of foreign investment.

I hope this resolves the issue so Klein can go forward confident that there's a solution.

Liberals in doubt?

Lately in the blogosphere I've noticed concern about the conflict between those who have supported modern liberal statism and those who are calling for a return to limited government and a free market. It plays out in debates like whether to continue government spending or start cutting back and getting government off the backs of businesses, or like Obama trying to get the EU to continue the stimulus and the EU realizing Keynesianism isn't working, or the principled Republican threats to challenge the healthcare law, and on and on. Some are saying we should all get along and stop the divisive bickering. David Brooks, as I wrote about, wants to simply avoid arrogance, and just compromise smartly. Ezra Klein is not sure how to determine the truth -- it's so fuzzy and all.

It appears the moderate-type liberals are calling for a meeting of the minds, an end to the stubborn adherence to principles and ideology. The modern, liberal, statist world view is takng a hit, the stimulus did not help, oil is still flowing in the gulf in spite of regulatory oversight and the brillant scientists in government, bad news after bad news comes out about the projected effects of the healthcare law, unemployment is stubbornly high, businesses are fighting back, the November elections are not looking good.

No wonder liberals want to back off from a heated debate over the role of government, they don't have strong justifications for comtinuing the course, and they need some company sharing the blame for the mess we're in. It worked for awhile blaming Bush, but now it's almost two years into the Obama presidency and progressive agenda, and, besides, the free market proponents are mostly people who thought Bush was wrong, too -- it's not about individuals, it's about principles, and the liberals have no answers. The only way they can sneak past this mess of an economy is if the free market proponents shut up -- but that's not happening. There's no need to join the liberal side and share blame, we didn't create this mess. We do, however, have a solution.

Uncertainty in the private sector

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/07/the_confidence_game.html

Ezra Klein wants the government to keep spending money so badly that he refuses to acknowledge the problems causing  a stagnant economy. Businesses aren't hiring because they are uncertain of the cost of hiring. Government intervention in the economy causes uncertainty when businesses don't know what's coming next. With high unemployment and lots of people losing their jobs, consumers are afraid to buy high dollar items, like homes -- plus, many think the prices will go lower. These two factors make another stimulus unlikely to have any real positive effect.

We need the creation of new wealth, but investors and businesses won't act until they are certain the changes are over and taxes will not go higher. Businesses are still uncertain how the new healthcare law will affect their bottom line -- they don't know how proposed energy regulation will affect their bottom line -- the don't know how the financial regulations will affect their bottom line and ability to get credit.

Plus, they don't know what's coming next, what new program will be implemented, what new regulations will affect their business or the economy as a whole. There are no stable rules to go by in a time of heavy government intervention. Businesses have to plan for the long run and so they need stable rules with no surprises from government. When the direction of government is going against businesses, then businesses are wary and cautious, in a defensive mode.

It's not just the deficit -- it's statism in general.

David Weigel lets it all hang out

http://dailycaller.com/2010/06/25/emails-reveal-post-reporter-savaging-conservatives-rooting-for-democrats/comment-page-1/#comments

Like many have already said, the surpising aspect of this story is that anyone thought Weigel is on the right, or a libertarian. The fact that he holds the views he holds is definitely not a problem -- who really cares?

It's only a story because the Washington Post hired Weigel to represent political views from the right, at least that's what I understood from the reports I've found online. Weigel was recommended by Ezra Klein, and it's difficult for me to believe that Klein didn't know why Weigel was being hired. Klein should have told the person hiring Weigel that Weigel represents the right like Bill Maher represents the tradition of political satire. Weigel should've told the person hiring him that he, Weigel, is a bonafide liberal with street-cred to prove it. But, more importantly, the guy doing the hiring should know the difference between liberals, conservatives and libertarians.

Tucker Carlson was wrong in reporting emails posted in a private setting. Carlson could've bypassed this one.

Government spending is profitable!

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/06/republicans_dont_oppose_stimul.html

Since spending on state and local aid creates a return of $1.41 on each dollar spent, we just need to calculate how much we need to spend on state and local aid in order to create enough profit to balance the budget.

Who knew it was this easy? What is government waiting on? Let's get that money out there!