The Coming Downfall of the American Economy

The Reality in Obamanation

Letter from a Dodge Dealer

More Smoke & Mirrors in DC

Peter Schiff cuts through Obama's illusions and expresses some common-sense advice:

California: The Canary in the Liberal Mineshaft

George Will has written a stunning article, showing precisely what has gone wrong with California's economy. Headed by a RINO governor and ultra-leftist congress, the state is a perfect example of where Barack Obama & Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid will be taking the entire United States. Simply put, the private sector can not afford to support a public sector that grows too large. Here's a telling snippet from Will's article:

The state's crisis has been caused by "moderation," understood as splitting the difference between extreme liberalism and hyperliberalism, a "reasonableness" that merely moderates the speed at which the ever-expanding public sector suffocates the private sector. California has become liberalism's laboratory, in which the case for fiscal conservatism is being confirmed. The state is a slow learner and hence will remain a drag on the nation's economy.

The GM & Chrysler Fiasco

David Berner has an excellent piece on the auto-manufacturing bailout.

Here's the comment I left:

Let's not ever forget the original impetus for this stupid bailout plan: Jack Layton and Stephane Dion, supported by Michael Ignatieff and Bob Rae. They DEMANDED that a bailout of the failing auto-sector occur ... no matter what.

Their demands were met ... big time!

At the same time, the executives of GM & Chrysler have accepted no significant cuts to their remuneration. As far as I know, the Canadian Auto Workers Union hasn't given up anything.

So effectively our hard earned tax dollars are going towards gold-plated salaries and benefits packages of a precious few. And make no mistake, now that the $$$$$ have started rolling out of Ottawa and down Hwy 401 to the auto-plants, it'll be extremely difficult to ever shut off that flow.

BC Starts Walking Down the Wrong Path

British Columbia's Premier Gordon Campbell and Finance Minister Colin Hansen announced yesterday that the province will now start running deficits again. In other words, we the people of BC will be spending more each year than we can afford and will expect future generations to pick up the tab for our largesse.

Oh sure, they're saying that the deficit will only run for 2 years but there's as much certainty of this happening as me winning a prize in a lottery; it might happen, but I doubt it.

But the provincial Liberals were in an untenable situation. Had they said the proper thing, "We will cut spending to the level that we can afford", they would have been skewered in the press and the NDP would cruise to an almost certain victory.

Principles are hard for a politician to stick to when an election draws near. Sigh.

Will President Obama Think Senator Obama Was a Twit?

Mark Steyn shares some of his final thoughts for 2008. Very funny, as always!

S.E.C. Incompetence

I just heard a detailed accounting of how Bernie Madoff has been able to pull off his $50 Billion scam over several decades. You can listen to it here (tune to 36:00). Here's the article of the interview subject, Binyamin Appelbaum.

One critical part of the story that is not yet mentioned on Wikipedia is how a competitor of Madoff's named Harry Markopolos took a careful look at what Madoff was doing. He concluded it was a scam way back in 1999. So he informed the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (S.E.C.), not just once, but multiple times. They ignored him repeatedly. Finally, in 2005 they did investigate Madoff and ... wait for it ... concluded that he was legit!

How on earth could the S.E.C. have failed to detect this massive crime? Was it just pure incompetence or was someone paid off?

This clearly had to be the rotten cherry on top of a year where the very roots of our entire financial system has been badly shaken.

---

Update: Sadly, one of the investors of Madoff, has allegedly committed suicide:

Mark Steyn on the Current Bailout Madness

General Motors now has a market valuation about a third of Bed, Bath & Beyond, and no one says your Swash 700 Elongated Biscuit Toilet Seat Bidet is too big to fail. GM has a market capitalization of about $2.4 billion. For purposes of comparison, Toyota's market cap is $100 billion and change (the change being bigger than the whole of GM). General Motors, like the other two geezers of the Old Three, is a vast retirement home with a small money-losing auto subsidiary. The UAW is AARP in an Edsel: It has three times as many retirees and widows as "workers" (I use the term loosely). GM has 96,000 employees but provides health benefits to a million people.

How do you make that math add up? Not by selling cars: Honda and Nissan make a pretax operating profit per vehicle of around $1,600; Ford, Chrysler and GM make a loss of $500 to $1,500. That's to say, they lose money on every vehicle they sell. Like Henry Ford said, you can get it in any color as long as it's red.

Full article here

Wise Words about the Big 3 Automakers

Here's CKNW's Bill Good paraphrasing a businessman he spoke with yesterday:

"There's always going to be a demand for cars. The market should decide. Let the chips fall where they may. Let these companies go down if they're going to go down. They will restructure or reform or new companies will emerge to take up the slack, to pick up the market. They've become too fat. They've become too inefficient. They've created contracts that are unworkable and untenable. We should just let them go and suffer the pain."

How the Media Divides Us

On the topic of "Media Shaping Public Opinion", here's a textbook example that should be used by political science and psychology classes for decades to come.

In the interview Finance Minister Jim Flaherty seems reasoned and logical to me. But to someone who has a predisposition against the Conservatives and/or doesn't inform themselves beyond the headlines about the global economic situation, it's easy to imagine how, after watching this interview, they would be angry with Flaherty.

Throughout, Craig Oliver is clearly trying to shape the interview from a very specific agenda. He has no intention of obtaining information from Flaherty. Instead, he's just trying to embarrass him. His phrasing of the questions comes from the perspective of, "You moron, you dummy, you backwoods neocon, how on earth can you possibly not be spending billions more dollars now, Now, NOW?!?"

Mr. Oliver, if you and your friends in Le Coalition had your way, specifically how much money should be given to GM, Ford, & Chrysler? What will this do for them? Since the demand for their cars has dropped dramatically, who specifically will they be selling cars to? If the U.S. ends up balking at any bailouts to these same 3 companies, can we count on you to personally retrieve our wasted taxpayer dollars back?

But sadly, most people don't these questions of the media. The original narrative of the journalist is allowed to continue, without ever questioning it. In this way, public opinion splits ... and the media take absolutely no responsibility.

By the way, at around 6:10 in the interview, Craig Oliver wins the Economic Ignoramus of the Year award by saying, "Reducing taxes doesn't put money into people's pockets."

And yet he is considered to be one of the leading lights in the Canadian media. Sigh.

Western Premiers Reportedly Preparing to Fight Le Cabal de Trois

Interesting developments are coming out of Alberta's capital city of Edmonton today. Apparently Premier Stelmach is not going to take this travesty of democratic justice sitting down! And BC's Premier Gordon Campbell and Saskatchewan's Premier Brad Wall may very well be joining him.

CANADIANS DESERVE AND DEMAND A NEW ELECTION!

John Mauldin on the Financial Crisis

Dennis Prager interviews financial guru John Mauldin about the current financial crisis. In very clear, simple terms he explains what is going on and that there is hope on the horizon.

For a more detailed explanation of how we got to this crisis please read this long but excellent article!

The Letter from 122 Top Economists to Congress

To the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate:

As economists, we want to express to Congress our great concern for the plan proposed by Treasury Secretary Paulson to deal with the financial crisis. We are well aware of the difficulty of the current financial situation and we agree with the need for bold action to ensure that the financial system continues to function. We see three fatal pitfalls in the currently proposed plan:

1) Its fairness. The plan is a subsidy to investors at taxpayers’ expense. Investors who took risks to earn profits must also bear the losses. Not every business failure carries systemic risk. The government can ensure a well-functioning financial industry, able to make new loans to creditworthy borrowers, without bailing out particular investors and institutions whose choices proved unwise.

2) Its ambiguity. Neither the mission of the new agency nor its oversight are clear. If taxpayers are to buy illiquid and opaque assets from troubled sellers, the terms, occasions, and methods of such purchases must be crystal clear ahead of time and carefully monitored afterwards.

3) Its long-term effects. If the plan is enacted, its effects will be with us for a generation. For all their recent troubles, America's dynamic and innovative private capital markets have brought the nation unparalleled prosperity. Fundamentally weakening those markets in order to calm short-run disruptions is desperately short-sighted.

For these reasons we ask Congress not to rush, to hold appropriate hearings, and to carefully consider the right course of action, and to wisely determine the future of the financial industry and the U.S. economy for years to come.

Signed (updated at 9/25/2008 8:30AM CT)

Acemoglu Daron (Massachussets Institute of Technology)
Adler Michael (Columbia University)
Admati Anat R. (Stanford University)
Alexis Marcus (Northwestern University)
Alvarez Fernando (University of Chicago)
Andersen Torben (Northwestern University)
Baliga Sandeep (Northwestern University)
Banerjee Abhijit V. (Massachussets Institute of Technology)
Barankay Iwan (University of Pennsylvania)
Barry Brian (University of Chicago)
Bartkus James R. (Xavier University of Louisiana)
Becker Charles M. (Duke University)
Becker Robert A. (Indiana University)
Beim David (Columbia University)
Berk Jonathan (Stanford University)
Bisin Alberto (New York University)
Bittlingmayer George (University of Kansas)
Boldrin Michele (Washington University)
Brooks Taggert J. (University of Wisconsin)
Brynjolfsson Erik (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
Buera Francisco J. (UCLA)
Camp Mary Elizabeth (Indiana University)
Carmel Jonathan (University of Michigan)
Carroll Christopher (Johns Hopkins University)
Cassar Gavin (University of Pennsylvania)
Chaney Thomas (University of Chicago)
Chari Varadarajan V. (University of Minnesota)
Chauvin Keith W. (University of Kansas)
Chintagunta Pradeep K. (University of Chicago)
Christiano Lawrence J. (Northwestern University)
Cochrane John (University of Chicago)
Coleman John (Duke University)
Constantinides George M. (University of Chicago)
Crain Robert (UC Berkeley)
Culp Christopher (University of Chicago)
Da Zhi (University of Notre Dame)
Davis Morris (University of Wisconsin)
De Marzo Peter (Stanford University)
Dubé Jean-Pierre H. (University of Chicago)
Edlin Aaron (UC Berkeley)
Eichenbaum Martin (Northwestern University)
Ely Jeffrey (Northwestern University)
Eraslan Hülya K. K.(Johns Hopkins University)
Faulhaber Gerald (University of Pennsylvania)
Feldmann Sven (University of Melbourne)
Fernandez-Villaverde Jesus (University of Pennsylvania)
Fohlin Caroline (Johns Hopkins University)
Fox Jeremy T. (University of Chicago)
Frank Murray Z.(University of Minnesota)
Frenzen Jonathan (University of Chicago)
Fuchs William (University of Chicago)
Fudenberg Drew (Harvard University)
Gabaix Xavier (New York University)
Gao Paul (Notre Dame University)
Garicano Luis (University of Chicago)
Gerakos Joseph J. (University of Chicago)
Gibbs Michael (University of Chicago)
Glomm Gerhard (Indiana University)
Goettler Ron (University of Chicago)
Goldin Claudia (Harvard University)
Gordon Robert J. (Northwestern University)
Greenstone Michael (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)
Guadalupe Maria (Columbia University)
Guerrieri Veronica (University of Chicago)
Hagerty Kathleen (Northwestern University)
Hamada Robert S. (University of Chicago)
Hansen Lars (University of Chicago)
Harris Milton (University of Chicago)
Hart Oliver (Harvard University)
Hazlett Thomas W. (George Mason University)
Heaton John (University of Chicago)
Heckman James (University of Chicago - Nobel Laureate)
Henderson David R. (Hoover Institution)
Henisz, Witold (University of Pennsylvania)
Hertzberg Andrew (Columbia University)
Hite Gailen (Columbia University)
Hitsch Günter J. (University of Chicago)
Hodrick Robert J. (Columbia University)
Hopenhayn Hugo (UCLA)
Hurst Erik (University of Chicago)
Imrohoroglu Ayse (University of Southern California)
Isakson Hans (University of Northern Iowa)
Israel Ronen (London Business School)
Jaffee Dwight M. (UC Berkeley)
Jagannathan Ravi (Northwestern University)
Jenter Dirk (Stanford University)
Jones Charles M. (Columbia Business School)
Kaboski Joseph P. (Ohio State University)
Kahn Matthew (UCLA)
Kaplan Ethan (Stockholm University)
Karolyi, Andrew (Ohio State University)
Kashyap Anil (University of Chicago)
Keim Donald B (University of Pennsylvania)
Ketkar Suhas L (Vanderbilt University)
Kiesling Lynne (Northwestern University)
Klenow Pete (Stanford University)
Koch Paul (University of Kansas)
Kocherlakota Narayana (University of Minnesota)
Koijen Ralph S.J. (University of Chicago)
Kondo Jiro (Northwestern University)
Korteweg Arthur (Stanford University)
Kortum Samuel (University of Chicago)
Krueger Dirk (University of Pennsylvania)
Ledesma Patricia (Northwestern University)
Lee Lung-fei (Ohio State University)
Leeper Eric M. (Indiana University)
Leuz Christian (University of Chicago)
Levine David I.(UC Berkeley)
Levine David K.(Washington University)
Levy David M. (George Mason University)
Linnainmaa Juhani (University of Chicago)
Lott John R. Jr. (University of Maryland)
Lucas Robert (University of Chicago - Nobel Laureate)
Luttmer Erzo G.J. (University of Minnesota)
Manski Charles F. (Northwestern University)
Martin Ian (Stanford University)
Mayer Christopher (Columbia University)
Mazzeo Michael (Northwestern University)
McDonald Robert (Northwestern University)
Meadow Scott F. (University of Chicago)
Mehra Rajnish (UC Santa Barbara)
Mian Atif (University of Chicago)
Middlebrook Art (University of Chicago)
Miguel Edward (UC Berkeley)
Miravete Eugenio J. (University of Texas at Austin)
Miron Jeffrey (Harvard University)
Moretti Enrico (UC Berkeley)
Moriguchi Chiaki (Northwestern University)
Moro Andrea (Vanderbilt University)
Morse Adair (University of Chicago)
Mortensen Dale T. (Northwestern University)
Mortimer Julie Holland (Harvard University)
Muralidharan Karthik (UC San Diego)
Nanda Dhananjay (University of Miami)
Nevo Aviv (Northwestern University)
Ohanian Lee (UCLA)
Pagliari Joseph (University of Chicago)
Papanikolaou Dimitris (Northwestern University)
Parker Jonathan (Northwestern University)
Paul Evans (Ohio State University)
Pejovich Svetozar (Steve) (Texas A&M University)
Peltzman Sam (University of Chicago)
Perri Fabrizio (University of Minnesota)
Phelan Christopher (University of Minnesota)
Piazzesi Monika (Stanford University)
Piskorski Tomasz (Columbia University)
Rampini Adriano (Duke University)
Reagan Patricia (Ohio State University)
Reich Michael (UC Berkeley)
Reuben Ernesto (Northwestern University)
Roberts Michael (University of Pennsylvania)
Robinson David (Duke University)
Rogers Michele (Northwestern University)
Rotella Elyce (Indiana University)
Ruud Paul (Vassar College)
Safford Sean (University of Chicago)
Sandbu Martin E. (University of Pennsylvania)
Sapienza Paola (Northwestern University)
Savor Pavel (University of Pennsylvania)
Scharfstein David (Harvard University)
Seim Katja (University of Pennsylvania)
Seru Amit (University of Chicago)
Shang-Jin Wei (Columbia University)
Shimer Robert (University of Chicago)
Shore Stephen H. (Johns Hopkins University)
Siegel Ron (Northwestern University)
Smith David C. (University of Virginia)
Smith Vernon L.(Chapman University- Nobel Laureate)
Sorensen Morten (Columbia University)
Spiegel Matthew (Yale University)
Stevenson Betsey (University of Pennsylvania)
Stokey Nancy (University of Chicago)
Strahan Philip (Boston College)
Strebulaev Ilya (Stanford University)
Sufi Amir (University of Chicago)
Tabarrok Alex (George Mason University)
Taylor Alan M. (UC Davis)
Thompson Tim (Northwestern University)
Tschoegl Adrian E. (University of Pennsylvania)
Uhlig Harald (University of Chicago)
Ulrich, Maxim (Columbia University)
Van Buskirk Andrew (University of Chicago)
Veronesi Pietro (University of Chicago)
Vissing-Jorgensen Annette (Northwestern University)
Wacziarg Romain (UCLA)
Weill Pierre-Olivier (UCLA)
Williamson Samuel H. (Miami University)
Witte Mark (Northwestern University)
Wolfers Justin (University of Pennsylvania)
Woutersen Tiemen (Johns Hopkins University)
Zingales Luigi (University of Chicago)
Zitzewitz Eric (Dartmouth College)

Source: http://faculty.chicagogsb.edu/john.cochrane/research/Papers/mortgage_protest.htm

An Important PSA for Both Americans and Canadians

It's important for all voters to pay close attention to how much all spending promises of politicians will cost. Remember, they won't be using their own money!

Thoughts about the AIG Takeover

“We are privatizing profits and socializing losses. The AIG takeover is the latest example of this and the wrong direction for America.”

Michele Bachmann

Republican Congresswoman

6^th District of Minnesota

Bob Cook: Trust in Our Free Enterprise System

In response to the boys of a family friend, who have cited a NY Times article on the Economy as "proof" of why they're supporting Obama, Bob Cook provides this retort:

TRUST IN OUR FREE ENTERPRISE SYSTEM SEEMS TO BE LACKING IN SENATOR OBAMA’S WORLD

A competitive free enterprise system is constantly enduring hurdles and setbacks, but the basic system is the best and most successful ever employed by mankind. To site one problem in one sector (Housing) that happened at the same time we have experienced a substantial pricing increase in oil (which affects us all) and then leap to a statement “IN FUNDAMENTAL WAYS, THE AMERICAN ECONOMY HAS STOPPED WORKING” is not based on fact. What it does is lay the groundwork for government to play a larger role in commerce.

Yes, belt tightening is absolutely inevitable if we are going to compete in the global marketplace. We have lived in a world of growth, new inventions and products, property values escalating, etc. but in a true free enterprise capitalistic system, there are NO GUARANTEES that will always consistently occur. Every time government tinkers with one area of the economy to prop something up, another area suffers.

Consumer debt unquestionably is too high and out of control. Discipline, Education, and Leadership must correct this problem, not throwing the “system” out or changing it dramatically! There are no guarantees in life. Services as well as products come and go as demand shifts. Businesses must change or die. Employees (and UNIONS) must understand change and the effects of supply and demand as well as the nature of a competitive environment. Without the understanding and mutual cooperation, businesses will fail or move to a more acceptable environment.

The subject of this country’s health care absolutely needs to be addressed. Problems abound with blame for all involved. Because we have the finest of medical care, caution must be exerted to make certain we do not sacrifice quality and expertise. Too much testing and too much running to hospitals with the most minor of problems are two of the many areas of concern.

Hospitals are settling law suits into the millions for every adverse reaction or mistake or even implied lack of skilled care. Something must be done to curtail or cap such huge outlays of capital. Some payment should be required from those wanting an abundance of attention.

Federal tax credits should be available for individuals providing their own health insurance. With life spans longer and health better, age 65 is no longer a realistic age to be triggering Social Security. A trust fund was established for this program, however, it was eliminated by LBJ and a Democrat controlled House and Senate and put in the General Fund. We must reestablish the Trust Fund and the new Clinton tax on receiving these funds should be diverted solely to this Trust Fund. More federal dollars must be moved from foreign aid and maintaining U.S. troops everywhere in the world, and spent wisely on America’s roads, bridges, and worker retraining as Bob Reich suggested long ago. Oil drilling (passed but vetoed by Bill Clinton) should finally be unleashed fully with vast job creation as a result. Why would there be vast quantities of oil in South America, Mexico and Canada, but little in the U.S.A.? That is very hard to buy!

Fiscal discipline by our government is absolutely essential. To say we must “fix global warming” is pure folly. We are not capable of such, and besides, it has not been warming in a decade! The idea of “emissions permits” issued by the government would be more government red tape leading to outlandish corruption. Obama would undoubtedly do the bidding of LABOR UNION BOSSES, often to the detriment of hardworking non-union workers. What do unions want: (1) Elimination of the secret ballot for unionization, (2) Elimination of NAFTA, (3) Establishment of trade barriers, (4) Federal penalties for businesses wishing to move to another country, (5) More government employees carrying a union card, and the list goes on. None of this would help our economy. Government involvement in more of private enterprise will spell disaster. Constant condemnation of PROFIT is dangerous and counterproductive. Certain industries should not be singled out as being too successful. That is not the attitude that made this country great. Education absolutely needs improvement, and the sooner bad teachers and administrators are dismissed, the better. Good, creative teaching should be singled out and rewarded. Those ideas are not acceptable to the mass leveling aura of unionism. Unions should not be running our schools. Competition works wonders at all other areas of life, and it should with education as well. All parents should be free to send their children to the school of their choice. If that means “Vouchers,” so be it as we are all taxed throughout or lives for the public school system whether we use it or not.

Capitalism is blamed for not delivering income equality and permitting budget deficits. The magic of CAPITALISM can do wonders, but not when hampered by unrealistic taxes, unreasonable regulations, and constant criticisms by the government. By raising personal federal taxes, Obama will hit thousands of job creating small businesses filing personally as “Subchapter-S” Corporations. What a dramatic blow to our economy this would be. This is one of the many important negatives of the OBAMA ECONOMIC AGENDA. Part of this agenda is a “windfall-profits tax” on oil companies. I could expect this in Cuba and Venezuela, but America? Both parties could use a lesson in staying out of private enterprise! Who would be next? This is not a government prerogative.

Ronald Reagan’s and George Bush’s tax plans worked, as most tax reductions do. To scrap this existing, successful plan would do great harm to the economy. Obama says that will be one of his first priorities. Obama’s $250,000 “family” tax increase will have a severe, long term, devastating effect. To penalize success, and continuously reduce the carrot at the end of the stick is to ignore and belittle the very thing that made this country great. Why must the liberal mind-set continuously penalize hardworking, accomplished people? What is wrong with “PROFIT”? Where do those profit dollars go? They go right back into the ECONOMY to keep the wheels turning. They are the fuel for a robust economy. They are not buried in the backyard! Sadly, Obama has made no exception for the vital “Sub-S” Corporations in his tax increase scheme. I say again, this will be very hurtful to the small business community.

The “HOPE CREDIT” for college would not be nearly as devastating and would probably work smoothly, helping those in need. With Medicaid going into big financial trouble, cutting payroll taxes does not seem to make any sense at all. Benefits are going to have to be cut, along with a higher age qualification, if this program has any chance of long term survival. The “FAIR TAX” should seriously be considered, but will not be in an OBAMA administration. Using the income tax to transfer money through government to low income earners is certainly not the roll of the federal government. Lowering taxes and even eliminating taxes is within the understandable realm of what Congress can reasonably do, but paying people who report low incomes is ridiculous and will lead to still more cheating and corruption regarding income tax reporting. A national sales tax (with proper exemptions) would eliminate all “underground” tax cheating. This is now referred to as the FAIR TAX.

When corporations are compelled to pay more tax, where do they go to obtain the funding? That’s right you and I, Mr. & Mrs. John Q. Public! Not only the stock holders hit, but eventually the users of every product or service provided by those corporations. There are so many pieces to an increased, robust economy as there are to a downturn and slow economy, and these changes occur slowly. To suggest that President Clinton’s tax hikes brought us prosperity is ridiculous. Forces were well underway toward such before his arrival, but look what had occurred at the end of his eight years, a serious recession.

President Bush did the right thing to cut taxes as he brought us out of the worsening recession. The deficit that occurred was not from that, but from excessive congressional spending on everything in sight. Government spending has got to be permanently brought under control. Eliminating “ear marks” and using line item vetoes (as well as complete vetoes) can help do this. The President absolutely must have such line item power which he does not have at present.

The thought of income redistribution patterned after such an effort in other countries makes no sense as it is not successfully working in those countries. Obama bemoans the fact that his party has failed to tell its story and the Republicans have done a good job of telling theirs. Could it be the Republicans have a sound common sense and reasoned format and the Democrats do not? Once again, deficits are referred to in this article as being a direct result of tax cuts. I believe these cuts dramatically stimulated the economy bringing more tax revenue, which in turn triggered greater government spending. This exacerbated and undisciplined spending is the root cause of the deficit. Both parties seek prosperity. A return to some measure of manufacturing will go a long way toward that end. Government can assist in that effort, but must work with and not against our wonderful competitive free enterprise system. Wouldn’t it be nice if we all pulled in the same direction?

Bob Cook
2008-09-02

2008-Q1: Canadian Economy Worse Than in U.S.

The smugness of Canadians may ease off a bit after hearing the news that the Canadian economy shrank in the first quarter of 2008, while the American economy grew by 3 times this same amount. This doesn't quite fit into the ongoing socialist narrative, does it?

De-nial is more than a river in Egypt!

The Hawaii Economy

We talked with a lot of local people and learned that not all is well here in Hawaii. The economy is really hurting. How are people getting by? By working 2 jobs and by doubling, if not tripling, up with others to cut down on rent.

52.6% of Americans Receive "Significant" Government Income

This article boggles my mind. It makes me wonder what percentage of Canadians are receiving similar significant amounts of income. I have to believe there'll be a tipping point beyond which those paying will refuse to any longer.