Widget Image
Follow PPD Social Media
Tuesday, February 25, 2025
HomeStandard Blog Whole Post (Page 667)

Weekly-Jobless-Claims-Graphic

Weekly Jobless Claims Graphic. Number of Americans applying for first-time jobless benefits.

The Labor Department said Thursday weekly jobless claims fell by 5,000 to 267,000 for the week ending December 19, far lower than the estimate for 270,000. The prior week was revised higher by 1,000 to 272,000.

The 4-week moving average–which is widely considered a better gauge as it irons out week-to-week volatility–stood at 272,500, an gain of 1,750 from the previous week’s revised average. The previous week’s average was revised up by 250 from 270,500 to 270,750.

An analyst for the Labor Department said there were no special factors impacting this week’s initial claims.

The highest insured unemployment rates in the week ending December 5 were in Alaska (4.2), Puerto Rico (3.0), West Virginia (2.8), Montana (2.6), New Jersey (2.6), Pennsylvania (2.6), California (2.4), Connecticut (2.3), Illinois (2.2), and Nevada (2.2).

The largest increases in initial claims for the week ending December 12 were in Michigan (+905), Rhode Island (+199), Ohio (+196), Arizona (+78), and Louisiana (+29), while the largest decreases were in New York (-10,297), Pennsylvania (-9,554), Wisconsin (-6,195), Georgia (-5,772), and Texas (-4,535).

The Labor Department said Thursday weekly jobless

Time for some holiday spirit. Last year, our night-before-Christmas story featured a very happy story about the benefits of deregulating air cargo. In 2011, Larry the Cable Guy read a politically correct version of the night-before-Christmas story.

This year, we have Ted Cruz’s rendition of the night before Christmas story.

[brid video=”22941″ player=”2077″ title=”Cruz Christmas Classics The Senator Who Saved Christmas Miracle on K Street and More”]

Needless to say, I especially enjoy the digs at ObamaCare and Lois Lerner.

And it goes without saying (but I’ll say it anyway) that I’m one of the few people who defend government shutdowns (indeed, as Jay Leno famously joked, the real problem is when it re-opens!).

But let’s not get distracted by real policy issues.

So to rekindle the spirit of the season, let’s share an adaptation of the night before Christmas classic from Merrill Matthews of the Institute for Policy Innovation.

‘Twas the week before Christmas, when all through the House,

All the liberals were stirring, while conservatives groused.

The wish lists were hung on the approps bill with care,

In hopes that Obama would bless it with flair.

The Members were nestled all smug in their heads,

While visions of donors danced in their heads.

As Ryan the new Chief, and Nancy the shill,

Agreed they would stick us with a huge spending bill.

They went to the House floor with most in cahoots,

One trillion and more and tax breaks to boot.

It took some arm-twisting to get enough votes,

While hapless taxpayers must carry the note.

Then on the House floor there came so much chatter,

That Members looked up to see what was the matter.

Away to their cell phones they flew like a flash,

To make sure their pet projects hadn’t been slashed.

They spoke not a word, but went straight to their work,

To pass all the goodies, while big-spenders smirked.

And laying restraint aside for the time,

Said let’s spend some money, put it all on the line.

Now, Ryan!, Now, Nancy!, Now, Hoyer and all;

On, Schumer!  On, Harry!  Cried Mitchell, “roll call.”

To the front of the room, and let gavel fall,

Now dash away! Dash away! Dash away all!

Their eyes—how they twinkled!  Their dimples how merry!

Their cheeks were like roses, from wine and the sherry!

They all slapped their backs and most had a smile,

Though taxpayers will feel the pain for a while.

But some raised a ruckus and said it’s not right,

“We promised the voters that we would be tight.”

“Who cares?” came the answer, “It’s Christmas, don’t fear,

We’ll just tell the voters we’ll do better next year.”

Then they sprang to their limos, with drivers inside,

And away they all flew, all filled up with pride.

And I heard them exclaim as they drove out of sight,

Happy Christmas to all, we spent trillions tonight!

In the interest of fairness, let’s also share the Bernie Sanders’s version of the story.

Of course, that’s not where the story really ends. The cartoon needs a few more frames to commemorate the 100 million-plus people butchered by communism.

CATO economist Dan Mitchell shares a few

Childrens-Home-Amarillo-Nativity

Timeline Photos – The Children’s Home – a roots and wings organization (Photo: Facebook)

An anonymous donor left $50,000 under the baby Jesus in the nativity set at the Children’s Home of Amarillo, a shelter for at-risk children that receives 75% of its funding from donations.

“We had a generous gift given to us last evening,” the home posted on its Facebook page. “A special thank you to the donor for this gift. Happy Holidays!”

The anonymous donation was found on Wednesday, December 16, 2015.

“This donation is wonderful and will allow us to continue providing all the needs for our children, and will continue to help enrich their lives and futures,” the home wrote in its website.

Darrin Murphy, the home’s president, told Gretchen Carlson on the “Real Story” Wednesday afternoon that the donor had spend time around the home and the children prior to leaving the donation. He said he felt God wanted him to support their efforts, and thought Christmas was the appropriate time.

An anonymous donor left $50,000 under the

higher-education-costs

In this video, produced by Learn Liberty, Professor Daniel Lin shows that doing so will actually lead to higher college costs, because loans/grants/tax credits are directly related to the increasing cost of education.

The unintended consequences of government intervention are almost always harmful. Consider the issue of higher education. Politicians start with the warm and fuzzy notion that it would be good to help more people go to college. So they create loans and grants to help them pay for tuition.

Costs-For-AmericansSounds nice and noble, right? And just think of the votes that can be harvested from grateful parents! So is this a win-win situation for both politicians and students? Well, let’s look at the real-world results.

As explained in the video below, there’s a lot of evidence that these loans and grants are the reason that higher education is now far more expensive (just as there is powerful data showing that subsidies lead to higher costs in other areas as well).

[brid video=”13211″ player=”2077″ title=”Why Is Higher Education So Expensive”]

And additional research is confirming this concern. A new study by Professor Grey Gordon of Indiana University and Professor Aaron Hedlund of the University of Missouri finds that government subsidies for higher education wind up benefiting colleges and universities and hurting students.

Here are the key findings.

We develop a quantitative model of higher education to test explanations for the steep rise in college tuition between 1987 and 2010. …We measure how much changes in underlying costs, reforms to the Federal Student Loan Program (FSLP), and changes in the college earnings premium have caused tuition to increase. All these changes combined generate a 106% rise in net tuition between 1987 and 2010, which more than accounts for the 78% increase seen in the data. Changes in the FSLP alone generate a 102% tuition increase.

Robby Soave of Reason reports on the new research.

…skyrocketing college tuition costs are the result of all-too-generous student loan policies. The study, authored by Grey Gordon and Aaron Hedlund, used a computer model to measure the effects of various economic forces on college costs. According to the model, no factor had more to do with rising tuition prices than loan subsidies. “Looking at individual factors, we find that expansions in borrowing limits drive 40% of the tuition jump and represent the single most important factor,” wrote the study’s authors. In fact, the “Bennett hypothesis”—the idea, first proposed by President Ronald Reagan’s Education Secretary William Bennett, that increasing student aid encourages colleges to jack up prices—fully explains all the tuition increases between 1987 and 2010, according to the study. …A recent study by the New York Federal Reserve reached a similar, albeit less dramatic, conclusion regarding the link between loans and tuition.

Regarding the study from the N.Y. Fed, here’s Robby’s report on that research.

The bottom line is that politicians want us to believe that subsidies are needed because college is getting more expensive. But what’s really happening is that college is getting more costly because of the subsidies!

Now let’s move to a separate question. We know that colleges and universities are getting a big windfall as a result of students loans and other subsidies. So how are they spending the money?

Not very well, according to researchers.

And that’s probably because much of this money is mostly being wasted on more bureaucracy. Here’s a chart showing trends in recent years.

Even more depressing, the research also shows that all this spending doesn’t improve human capital, so there’s a negative impact on overall economic performance.

P.S. Politicians who complain about “cuts” in spending for higher education areeither dishonest or ignorant.

P.P.S. Speaking of which, Hillary Clinton’s plan for higher education is a recipe to enable even higher costs for colleges and universities.

P.P.P.S. Some folks hope that there’s a soon-to-pop bubble in higher education, which means that tuition will soon become more affordable. But I’m worried that higher education is more like health care rather than housing, which means that prices will climb even higher over time.

The unintended consequences of government intervention are

new-home-construction-housing-starts

(Photo: Reuters)

The Commerce Department reported on Wednesday new home sales rose 4.3% last month to an annualized rate of 490,000 single-family units, missing the 505,000 forecast.

Economists polled by Reuters had forecast new home sales, which account for about 9.3 percent of the housing market, rising to a rate of 505,000 units last month. Sales were up 9.1 percent compared to November of last year.

Still, the data will likely help in tamping down concern over the housing market in the face of the Federal Reserve announcing the first rate hike in seven years, as well as sales of previously owned homes tumbling 10.5% in November. The National Association of Realtors (NAR) reported on Tuesday existing home sales of single-family homes tanked to an annualized rate of 4.76 million units, far missing expectations. Realtors and NAR’s chief economists blamed the steep decline on new regulations that were delaying contract closings.

“Sparse inventory and affordability issues continue to impede a large pool of buyers’ ability to buy, which is holding back sales,” said Lawrence Yun, chief economist at NAR. “However, signed contracts have remained mostly steady in recent months, and properties sold faster in November. Therefore it’s highly possible the stark sales decline wasn’t because of sudden, withering demand.”

At November’s sales pace it would take 5.7 months to go through the supply in the housing market, down from 5.8 months in October. The median price of a new home increased 0.8 percent from a year ago to $305,000.

The Commerce Department reported new home sales

jon-favreau-schlonged

Jon Favreau, a former speechwriter for a certain then-Illinois senator, groping now-Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton after Obama defeated her in the primary.

Folks, here is liberal hypocrisy at its grimiest. Republican frontrunner Donald Trump is taking flack after yet another orchestrated attempt to dominate media coverage of the GOP primary. At a rally in Michigan this week, Trump said the once inevitable 2008 Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton “got schlonged” by then-Senator Barack Obama.

Enter Jon Favreau, the former director of speechwriting for the president, who was all too quick to pounce on The Donald along with the rest of the leftwing mediates and politicos faking outrage. However, even though Mr. Favreau now thinks Trump is “gross” for using the past tense version schlonge, he failed to mention how he treated a life-size cutout of Mrs. Clinton after the 2008 election.

https://twitter.com/Peoples_Pundit/status/679692085499457536

Favreau, now a columnist at the leftwing Daily Beast, is on the left groping the cutout of Hillary in the picture above. He reportedly apologized to Clinton yet still went on to serve in the Obama White House. Trump, for his part, is attacking the media over their response.

A former Obama speechwriter who groped a

durable-goods-reuters

American workers at a manufacturing plant for long-lasting durable goods. (PHOTO: REUTERS)

The Commerce Department reported Wednesday that durable goods orders were flat in November, though economists surveyed by The Wall Street Journal expected a 0.6% decline.

The disappointing durable goods orders–which tracks demand for refrigerators, bulldozers, fighter jets and other products designed to last at least three years–showed a key measure of business investment fell in what was the latest sign of weak demand in the U.S. manufacturing sector.

In fact, military spending accounted for all of the month’s gain and headline figure. Orders for defense capital goods absolutely skyrocketed by 44.4% last month, including a 46.9% gain in orders for defense aircraft and parts. Excluding defense, durable goods orders actually declined 1.5% in November after increasing 3.0% in October. Excluding the volatile transportation category, durable goods orders fell 0.1% in November from the prior month after rising 0.5% in October.

The manufacturing sector, which accounts for roughly 12% of the nation’s economic output but disproportionately offers higher-wage employment, has essentially been on life support for the majority of the year. It is expected to close out the year limping along.

The Commerce Department report follows manufacturing sector data in the mid-Atlantic and Northeast regions. The Philadelphia Federal Reserve said this month the Manufacturing Business Outlook Survey covering the mid-atlantic region tumbled to -5.9 in December from 1.9, falling back into contraction. The Empire State Manufacturing Survey, the New York Fed’s gauge of manufacturing activity in the Northeast region, remained stuck in contraction territory, as well.

Further, the Institute for Supply Management (ISM) Manufacturing Business Survey, which gauges manufacturing activity nationwide, also fell into contraction to 48.6 in November from 50., well below expectations.

Meanwhile, durable goods orders in the first 11 months of 2015 fell 3.7% on the year.

The Commerce Department reported that durable goods

holiday-retail-shopping-consumers

Consumers ready for holiday shopping, the busiest time of the year for retail outlets. (Photo: Reuters)

Consumer spending, which accounts for more than two-thirds of U.S. economic activity, matched the media forecast and increased by 0.3% in November. Meanwhile, personal income increased by 0.3%, slightly beating out the expected 0.2% gain.

Consumer spending, which accounts for more than

Chelsea-Hillary-Clinton-Marc-Mezvinsky

Marc Mezvinsky, left, a partner in a New York hedge fund and the husband of Chelsea Clinton, and Hillary Clinton, right. (Photos: AP)

When driving on treacherous roads, guardrails are useful. If you fall asleep or maybe you’re just a bad driver, guardrails may prevent you from going off a cliff.

Recently, The Wall Street Journal’s Kimberley Strassel used the phrase “no political guardrails” to point out how many of today’s politicians seem to lack any constraints, any safeguards against their use of power. She’s onto something.

“Mr. Obama wants what he wants. If ObamaCare is problematic, he unilaterally alters the law,” Strassel writes. “If the nation won’t support laws to fight climate change, he creates one with regulation. If the Senate won’t confirm his nominees, he declares it in recess and installs them anyway.”

Hillary Clinton does it too. In fact, she promises that once she becomes president, that is how she will govern. If Congress won’t give her gun control laws she wants, she says she’ll unilaterally impose them. Likewise, if Congress rejects her proposed new tax on corporations, “then I will ask the Treasury Department, when I’m there, to use its regulatory authority, if that’s what it takes.”

Whatever it takes. So far, the public doesn’t seem to mind.

Donald Trump’s poll numbers go up after he promises “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States,” says that “there’s nobody bigger or better at the military than I am,” says that he’ll make Mexico “pay for that wall” and so on.

Apparently lots of people like the idea of a big, strong mommy or daddy who will take control of life and make everything better. Constitutional restraints? They’re for sissies. We want “leadership” — someone “strong” to run America.

I don’t. I’m an adult. I don’t want to be “led.” I will run my own life. Also, a president doesn’t “run America.” The president presides over just one of three branches of government, and there are strict limits on what he can and should do.

The Constitution was written to limit political authority. Those limits left individual Americans mostly to our own devices, which helped create the freest and most prosperous country in the history of the world.

Now, advocates for both parties are off the rails. Some Republicans demand that the IRS audit the Clinton Foundation. Part of me wishes that it would. I suspect their foundation is largely a scam, a pretend charity that props up the Clintons’ egos and pays Hillary’s political flunkies. Heck, in 2013, it raised $144 million but spent only $8.8 million on charity!
Shut it down! But where are the guardrails here? As Strassel put it, “When did conservatives go from wanting to abolish the IRS to wanting to use it against rivals?”

Today, politicians act as if guardrails are just an annoyance. And they get rewarded for that.

Strassel writes, “The more outrageous Mr. Trump is, the more his numbers soar. The more Mrs. Clinton promises to cram an agenda down the throats of her ‘enemies,’ the more enthusiastic her base. The more unrestrained the idea, the more press coverage; the more ratings soar, the more unrestrained the idea.”

By contrast, humble candidates, quieter ones with modest plans — constitutional ones — get lost in the noise.

So does important government reform. While people argued whether Trump dislikes immigrants, Congress quietly reauthorized the Export-Import Bank, a huge and immoral subsidy for corporations.

A coalition of free-market and anti-corporate-welfare activists fought to get Ex-Im Bank funding eliminated and finally won — but then their work was quietly undone in a massive spending bill.

I once had lunch with Paul Ryan, R-Wis. He talked about reading Ayn Rand, and he emphasized the need to cut government spending. Now he’s the speaker of the House who just oversaw a record-sized spending bill that doles out money to both parties’ pet projects.

Little of that is authorized in the Constitution, which was intended to leave to the people or the states everything not explicitly mentioned in the document.

Today, we get a depressing combination of big, showy violations of constitutional rules — which distract us from the tiny, routine violations of constitutional rules.

Individual freedom, and limited government, is better.

Today, politicians act as if guardrails are

Obama-Syrian-Refugees-Behaving-Badly

Barack Obama delivers a statement on the attacks in Paris from the press briefing room on Friday Nov. 13, 2015, left, and a Syrian refugee yells at a Hungarian border guard. (Photos: Pete Souza/WH/Reuters)

The untold casualty of the great wars of the 20th century, particularly World War I, was socialist theory as a sound intellectual school of thought. European socialists in Germany and France prior to the war believed in a “spontaneous harmony of interests” among the various proletariat parties in each country, which in their view, would put the common aspirations of all socialists above individual national interests.

Well, of course, they were wrong. As international relations realist Kenneth Waltz correctly argued in Man, the State and War, the harmony of interests and common aspirations “quickly broke down” as “each socialist party found itself bound to its national state by ties of emotional and material interest.” Vladimir Lenin chastised his statist counterparts for their failure to live up to socialist ideals and evolved the Marxist theory in a futile attempt to explain the more “problematic promises of socialism.”

Tom Nairn, who is often referred to as the heir to the Marxist school of social science, wrote that “the theory of nationalism represents Marxism’s great historical failure.”

Why? Because nationalism is more powerful than ideology.

Look, I don’t write opinion columns often. But, when I do, there is little regard for political correctness, feelings or potential offenses. In other words, you’ve been warned and, if you happen to be someone who cannot handle the empirical and historical truth because it invariably contains micro-aggressions, then stop reading.

Nationalism, or the concept of nation, has proven difficult to define–yet, much to the chagrin of statists–exists nonetheless. For the Left, it has proven far more difficult to defeat, and that has been particularly true of their efforts in America. As someone who has researched extensively and help define it, perhaps with and in more detail than any other before me, I can say without flinching that the American national identity is the most antithetical to statism the world has ever seen; and, that is definitively the case if we are limited to the history of the modern liberal nation-state.

So, after decades of trying to disprove or discredit the phenomena of nation, statists in all their forms refocused and dedicated their efforts to destroy it. Those efforts have been two-fold and include 1) redefining the ideological spectrum and, 2) pushing for a preferably more secularized, pluralistic society that diminishes Christianity, specifically the Protestant ethic.

Ideological Spectrum

Statism-Spectrum-Ideological-Spectrum

The ideological spectrum, as our founders understood it and as it truly exists, looks very different than the modern narrative pushed by the Left, which the Right has largely conceded. In order to get a better grip on reality, let’s look at the Statist Spectrum above. What is particularly noteworthy is where fascism falls on the Statist Spectrum for a number of reasons; among them being that fascism belongs to the political Left, not the Right as we are led to believe.

NAZI, after all, stood for the National Socialist German Workers’ Party. Regardless, our founders would’ve associated the far Left with “rulers’ law” and the far Right with “no law,” or anarchy. When we put this truth into perspective, then we come to realize that the modern Right is really our Founding Fathers’ political center. Perhaps that’s worth conserving, after all?

Which brings us to Islam and the Left’s insistence on increasing immigration from Muslim-dominated countries in the face of dire warnings from the intelligence community.

Pluralistic Society

Sharia-Law-Support-by-Muslim-CountryThose who understand Sharia as it is practiced in the Muslim world wouldn’t be very honest with themselves if they didn’t ask, “What could possibly account for the Left’s defense of Islam and their strong condemnation of Christianity?” Islam is not simply a religion. It’s a political, judicial, civil and spiritual way of life that also includes geo-political aspirations. In a majority of Muslim-dominated Middle East countries, large pluralities–and, in many countries majorities–support making Sharia law the official law of the land.

In fact, a majority of American Muslims desire the same. Don’t take my word for it. Raheel Raza, a Sunni Muslim and human rights activist, revealed the disturbing truth in a serious video recently produced by The Clarion Project.

For all intensive purposes that should scare the hell out of the so-called defenders of women’s rights, gay rights and the like. But it shouldn’t at all surprise us to learn not a single Muslim-dominated nation is truly democratic, let alone working toward republicanism. When pushed into democratically held elections by the international community, Islamists have seen the biggest gains. Egypt, Palestine and even Turkey, all have moved toward Islamist supremacy by popular support.

But these truths and dangers are secondary to the political benefit that Muslims bring to the Left. Islamofascism, whether politically correct a term or not, correctly underscores the cultural tendency of Muslims to follow dictatorial “rulers’ law.” Ben Carson was brave and fundamentally correct to say that Sharia is antithetical to American values and the spirit of the U.S. Constitution, and according to the polls most Americans know it.

On the other hand, Judeo-Christian values are as much opposed to Islam as they are to statism, plain and simple. Islam, unlike individualism and other values practiced in the American mainstream Protestant ethic, fits neatly with the statist ideology and adherence to centralized authority.

Let’s get one thing straight, Islam means submission, not peace or tolerance. Throughout the history of the Islamic world, there was only peace under a Pax Islamica, a world or region dominated by Islam. That was the goal 1,400 years ago and it has remained unchanged today.

It is intellectually dishonest to argue otherwise so long as Islam remains in its current form. The good news is that Muslim leaders like Egyptian President al-Sisi and King Abdullah of Jordan are willing to wage a war on those in their faith who follow Islamic law to the letter. The bad news is our president and the American Left, are not. It benefits them little to do so. Whether intentional, conscious or not, it is worth it to the Left to put our lives and our national security at risk because it puts our very nation at risk.

And, for them, that’s the ultimate goal.

[mybooktable book=”our-virtuous-republic-forgotten-clause-american-social-contract” display=”summary” buybutton_shadowbox=”true”]

Why President Obama and the American Left

People's Pundit Daily
You have %%pigeonMeterAvailable%% free %%pigeonCopyPage%% remaining this month. Get unlimited access and support reader-funded, independent data journalism.

Start a 14-day free trial now. Pay later!

Start Trial