Is Gov. Mike DeWine a pessimist?

photo credit: businessinsider.com

President Trump has been suggesting that the various restrictions recommended to slow the spread of the coronavirus could be lifted as early as Easter (April 12).  He has referenced the economic health of the US, and the other day I quoted Mike Rowe:

. . .we’re treating a virus that MIGHT have devastating consequences, in a way that will GUARANTEE devastating consequences.

. . .

. . . I also know that Safety First is no way to live indefinitely. We are at base, a Safety Third nation. We can’t remain in the air raid shelter indefinitely – if we do, they’ll be no country left, when we finally emerge.

In response to Trump’s optimism and intention to balance the health of people with the financial health (and security) of the country, the markets started to rebound. 

Cleveland.com reported yesterday:

Gov. Mike DeWine also insisted he wasn’t that far apart from President Donald Trump on their approach to the coronavirus. Trump wants America to get back to business around Easter, about two weeks from now. 

But now The Hill reports that 

Democratic and Republican governors, as well as local officials, are pushing back against President Trump’s signals that he wants to restart the economy by Easter, warning that ending strict social distancing practices could put millions of lives at risk.

Governors have ordered residents to practice those distancing procedures, to varying degrees. Many have ordered residents to stay at home, ordered nonessential businesses closed and banned gatherings of all but a few people.

And several say they will keep those orders in place even if Trump rolls back the few national restrictions he has put in place.

Among those governors is Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine:

Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine (R) said “people are dying and people don’t feel safe,” therefore the economy would not come back.

“We have to #FlattenTheCurve so that when the wave comes, it’s not as big as it would have been and we are prepared for it. We are going to get our economy back, but we have to get through it, protect as many lives as we can, and then move forward. I’m looking forward to that day, but it’s not here yet,” DeWine tweeted.

Meantime, we’ve been to the grocery store, been patronizing our local bistros by ordering take-out, comparing notes with family and friends, etc.  So far, everyone we’ve talked to is looking forward to getting back to normal.  They're concerned but not scared.  We’re optimistic.

# # #

President Trump is a threat?

It’s the Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday weekend, so I was looking for some essays and think-pieces that might be of interest to Tea Party readers.  One that I found is J. B. Shurk’s somewhat wider perspective of President Trump, as published at American Thinker (and if you dislike President Trump, you still may find his perspectives interesting). The title: “What Do Democrats Fear in Donald Trump? Greatness.”  Here’s a sample:

Consider how many powerful ideas Donald Trump has cast into the national consciousness.  He has exposed both major parties as socialist globalist cults more concerned with government health care and foreign nation-building than a policy for American freedom.  He has exposed how free trade can never be free when based on slave labor.  He has exposed how the silent destruction of towns across the Midwest came not from China's comparative advantage, but from American companies' use of slavery by proxy.  He has redirected investment away from Wall Street and toward Main Street for the first time in over thirty years and has unleashed three decades' worth of pent up entrepreneurial energy in the very towns long deemed dead.  He has questioned how the federal government can have any legitimacy if it fails at enforcing its very own immigration laws.  

Not one Nobel laureate imagined this American renaissance of GDP and stock market surge, record-low unemployment, wage growth, and low inflation in one bubbling cauldron.  It took a change agent.  Not one foreign policy mandarin suggested unleashing the entrepreneurial spirit of the American oil man in order to destroy our enemies' power over us permanently.  It took a change agent.  Not one State Department official questioned why the United States was still subsidizing Europe's generous socialist welfare system seventy years after WWII.  It took a change agent.  Nobody wondered why we were enriching China at our own expense and preparing for a world where a communist dictator would lead.  It took Donald Trump.

Without worry or apology, Donald Trump stands before the world with a giant mirror, and the world does not like what it sees.  

. . .

What his fiercest adversaries [such as James Carville] are only now realizing is that Trump has shifted the trajectory of history permanently. 

Read the full article here.

# # #

Conrad Black on “Trump’s Whirlwind Year”

Image credit: westernjournal.com

Conrad Black has a great wrap-up of Trump’s presidential campaign, election and first year as POTUS. He begins with Trump’s candidacy:

Trump was attacking the entire political establishment, the whole Washington sleaze factory, all factions of both parties, all the Bushes, Clintons, and Obama, the national media, the lobbyists, Wall Street, Hollywood, and the limousine Left from the Hamptons to Silicon Valley. Of course the Trump campaign was insane and impossible, and was doomed to be a ludicrous fiasco, a gigantic, comical clown act that misfired horribly.

On Election Night, Nobel prize–winning (for economics) New York Times columnist Paul Krugman said the stock market would “never recover” from the Trump victory. (It has set a new all-time high more than 90 times since.) . . .

This year [Trump] has won over the congressional Republican party, which had almost entirely opposed him, to toil in the enactment of his program. Together they have achieved the greatest tax reform and reduction in over 30 years, largely emasculated Obamacare, put a rod on the backs of those states that elect incompetents like Jerry Brown and the Cuomos and lay the resulting state income taxes off on the whole country, repatriated trillions of dollars of corporate profit, exonerated over half the people from personal income taxes, reduced the return of 80 percent of taxpayers to a postcard, and produced conditions for 4 percent GDP growth next year. . . .

Considering the sustained assault of 90 percent of the media, in which the normal honeymoon for a new president has been replaced by a daily media assassination squad, he has done well. 

The article is at the National Review website here.

# # #

Trump and Clinton on the economy and jobs

art credit: politichicks.com 

Betsy McCaughey is a senior fellow at the London Center for Policy Research. Tea party and liberty groups will recognize her name from her ongoing analyses, from the beginning, of Obamacare. Many in those groups are not happy that Trump is the presumptive candidate. Some of the dissatisfaction stems from the perception that Trump is not a true conservative at heart, that’s he’s an egomaniac and braggart, and so on. In yesterday’s column in The New York Post, McCaughey looks at the economic prospects under either a Clinton or a Trump presidency.

President Obama’s top banker Janet Yellen gave a somber assessment of the current job market this week, throwing cold water on the president’s election-year message that voters should elect a Democrat to the White House again.

Obama’s been bragging that America has “the strongest” economy in the world. And pigs can fly.

Growth under Obama has averaged a stagnant 1.7 percent a year. Meanwhile, Ireland is growing at nearly 8 percent, India at 7 percent, Sweden at 4 percent.

The Obama economy is embarrassing compared to those countries — and compared to what Americans enjoyed for decades. It’s “the worst economic-growth record of any president” since the Great Depression, says Stanford economist Michael Boskin.

Last week’s economic reports were bad news for job seekers. Growth dipped below 1 percent in the first quarter, and full-time employment actually shrank in May.

We can’t let Obama-stagnation become the new normal. It’s driving Americans to self-destruction. Deaths from alcoholism, drug addiction, cirrhosis of the liver and suicides — what Princeton University researcher Anne Case calls “deaths of despair” — have soared.

These tragedies raise the stakes in this presidential election. Who’s equipped to jump-start America’s economy, Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump?

Spoiler alert: It’s not Hillary. She makes her money giving speeches and promoting books about herself.

Of course, Trump is no slouch when it comes to self-promotion. But he’s made a fortune actually building businesses. Trump runs an impressive 185 income-producing ventures, all listed on his 104-page Financial Disclosure Statement. (Hillary’s is only 11 pages.)

The mogul has built office buildings, apartment buildings, golf resorts and other ventures worldwide. He builds things and creates jobs. He also rakes in hefty fees managing properties worldwide, because their owners are confident he’s effective.

People like Trump, who run businesses themselves, understand why our economy is stuck in low gear. High taxes and suffocating, costly regulations are turning off investors. As economist Larry Kudlow explains, investment — in computers, factory buildings, equipment, trucks — is declining, indicating slow job growth ahead. A business that can’t buy more trucks can’t hire more drivers.

To boost investment, Trump calls for lowering taxes on businesses to 15 percent — less than half the nominal rate now — and reducing regulation. Obama calls Trump’s tax policies “crazy.” But if you want to see crazy, take a look at Hillary’s proposals.

She calls her plan “fair growth.” The phrase should strike terror into the heart of any business owner. It means more gender and racial preferences in hiring, more government rules on how employees are paid, and tax hikes to push companies into what she calls “far-sighted investments.” Yikes, Uncle Sam will be taking a seat in boardrooms and looking over managers’ shoulders.

That will discourage investment. Weak investment is already to blame for the hiring slowdown, points out economist David Malpass. Overall, the economy lost 59,000 full-time jobs, gaining only in part-time spots.

America is becoming a nation of part-timers. The average work week has shrunk to 34 hours — not enough to support a family.

Hillary wouldn’t know. She pulls in $250,000 for an hour at the podium, and sometimes racks up two speaking fees a day. Nice work if you can get it. Who needs full-time?

Hillary earns her money blabbing, while Trump earns his building.

Clinton is assailing Trump for not releasing his tax returns. Face it, most politicians willingly release their returns because there isn’t much to see. (Like speaking fees.) Whereas a builder’s return reveals how he makes money — suppliers, labor, depreciation and everything else.

Now Washington pols are pushing a bill authorizing the IRS to release the returns of any presidential candidate who doesn’t disclose voluntarily. Who would want the IRS to have that power?

The real issue isn’t Trump’s taxable income, but what the rest of us are able to earn. Americans need more take-home pay. The prospects look better with a builder in the White House than with a blabber.

# # #

US Slips To 12th In Economic Freedom

Art credit: canwebelieveit.info

Not good news from Breitbart:

US Slips To 12th In Economic Freedom

A new report of "economic freedom" around the world finds the US ranked 12th among 152 countries, tied with the United Kingdom, and lower than neighbor Canada or Australia. The index, published by the Cato Institute and Canada's Fraser Institute, has been published since 1996. As recently as 2000, the US ranked 2nd in the world, in terms of boasting a free economy. The US's declining ranking will lower future economic growth. 

The index, built on decades of research by Nobel laureates and dozens of leading scholars,measures 5 broad factors that impact the economy: 1. Size of government; 2. Legal structure and security of property rights; 3. Access to sound money; 4. Freedom to trade internationally and; 5. Regulation of Credit, Labor and Business. Countries where citizens are freer to engage in business and trade and property and legal rights are protected by the rule of law will score higher on the index. According to economic research, though, these countries will also do better economically and create and generate more wealth. 

The 10 freest economies in the world are: Hong Kong, Singapore, New Zealand, Switzerland, Mauritius, United Arab Emirates, Canada, Australia, Jordan, and Chile and Finland tied for 10th. 

America's descent down the ladder of economic freedom is unsettling, in itself. More troubling, however, is the chief factor behind the US decline. The biggest drop in US economic freedom has been in the country's legal structure. The report notes that, "increased use of eminent domain to transfer property to powerful political interests, the ramifications of the wars on terrorism and drugs, and the violation of the property rights of bondholders in the auto-bailout case have weakened the tradition of strong adherence to the rule of law in United States." 

The rule of law has long been the foundation of America's economic prosperity and liberty. The US ranking in this area has plummeted to a terrible 36th place in the world. This, combined with increased regulation is stifling US economic growth. The report observes, "[t]o a large degree, the United States has experienced a significant move away from rule of law and toward a highly regulated, politicized, and heavily policed state."

Read the rest here.

President Obama & the Democrats Assault on College Students

In President Obama & the Democrats continued "War on Children" we see how his North Korean like ballistic missiles of fiscal and economic failure have crashed down on many youthful supporters of his 2008 ascent to Commander of Youthful Grief, (the office formerly known as Commander in Chief).

A report done by the Economic Policy Institute shows unemployment for young college graduates was 10.4% in 2010, and the underemployment rate was 19.8%. For young high school graduates, the statistics were even grimmer: unemployment was 32.7% in 2010, and the underemployment rate was 55.9%.

From the Economic Policy Institute --

Though the labor market is now headed in the right direction, the prospects for young high school and college graduates remain grim. This briefing paper examines the labor market that confronts young graduates who are not enrolled in additional schooling—specifically, high school graduates age 17–20 and college graduates age 21–24—and details the following findings:

• Unemployment and underemployment rates of young graduates have only modestly improved since their peak in 2010. 

• For young high school graduates, the unemployment rate was 32.7 percent in 2010 and 31.1 percent over the last year (April 2011–March 2012), while the underemployment rate was 55.9 percent in 2010 and 54.0 percent over the last year.

• For young college graduates, the unemployment rate was 10.4 percent in 2010 and 9.4 percent over the last year, while the underemployment rate was 19.8 percent in 2010 and 19.1 percent over the last year.

• There is no evidence that young high school graduates have been able to “shelter in school” from the labor market effects of the Great Recession; college and university enrollment rates for both men and women have not meaningfully departed from their long-term trend since the start of the Great Recession.

• The long-run wage trends for young graduates are bleak, with wages substantially lower today than they were in 2000. Between 2000 and 2011, the real (inflation-adjusted) wages of young high school graduates declined by 11.1 percent, and the real wages of young college graduates declined by 5.4 percent.

• Young graduates lack opportunities for advancement, a trend underscored by the fact that there are now nearly 30 percent fewer voluntary quits each month than there were each month in 2007.

• Graduating in a bad economy has long-lasting economic consequences. For the next 10 to 15 years, the Class of 2012 will likely earn less than they would have if they had graduated when job opportunities were plentiful.

• The safety net of federal and state assistance programs often does not cover young workers due to eligibility requirements such as significant prior work experience.

• The cost of higher education has grown far more rapidly than median family income, leaving students with little choice but to take out loans, which, upon graduating into a labor market with limited job opportunities, they may not have the funds to repay.

• The scarcity of job opportunities for the Class of 2012 is a symptom of weak demand for workers in the overall economy. What will bring down the unemployment rate of young workers most quickly and effectively are policies that will generate strong job growth overall, such as fiscal relief to states, substantial additional investment in infrastructure, expanded safety net measures, and direct job creation programs in communities particularly hard-hit by unemployment.



Unemployment and underemployment rates for young college graduates, 1994–2012

 To read the whole report click here.

But on the bright side... the Master Degree counter workers at McDonald's will now know how to give change!