Widget Image
Follow PPD Social Media
Tuesday, March 4, 2025
HomeStandard Blog Whole Post (Page 827)

(Photo: REUTERS)

February existing home sales rose less than expected as a shortage of properties on the market pushed prices up, suggesting a new weight on the housing market. The National Association of Realtors said on Monday that existing home sales rose by just 1.2 percent to an annual rate of 4.88 million units.

“Insufficient supply appears to be hampering prospective buyers in several areas of the country and is hiking prices to near unsuitable levels,” Lawrence Yun, NAR chief economist said. “Stronger price growth is a boon for homeowners looking to build additional equity, but it continues to be an obstacle for current buyers looking to close before rates rise.”

January’s sales pace was unrevised at 4.82 million units, but the NAR argued sales were also constrained by a harsh winter weather. However, though sales in the Northeast cratered by 6.5 percent last month, sales in the Midwest (clearly affected by weather) were unchanged.

“Severe below-freezing winter weather likely had an impact on sales as more moderate activity was observed in the Northeast and Midwest compared to other regions of the country,” Yun added.  “With all indications pointing to a rate increase from the Federal Reserve this year – perhaps as early as this summer – affordability concerns could heighten as home prices and rents both continue to exceed wages.”

Sales rose 1.9 percent in the South and increased 5.7 percent in the West. Economists had forecast home resales, which are measured at the closing of contracts, rising to a 4.90 million-unit pace last month.

“Investor sales are trending downward due to the continued rise in prices and fewer bargains available from distressed properties coming onto the market,” says NAR President Chris Polychron, executive broker with 1st Choice Realty in Hot Springs, Ark. “Furthermore, Realtors in areas popular to foreign buyers, such as South Florida and the West Coast, are reporting tempered demand from international clients – who typically pay in cash – due to the strengthening U.S. dollar compared to foreign currencies.”

February existing home sales rose less than

vat-tax

Even though I fret about a growing burden of government and have little faith in the ability (or desire) of politicians to make wise decisions, I somehow convince myself that good things will happen.

Here’s some of what I wrote two years ago, when asked whether I thought America could be saved from a Greek-style fiscal collapse.

I think there’s a genuine opportunity to save the country. …we can at least hold the line and prevent government from becoming bigger than it is today. Sort of a watered-down version of Mitchell’s Golden Rule. The key is the right kind of entitlement reform.

But in that same article, I also issued this warning.

I may decide to give up if something really horrible happens, such asadoption of a value-added tax. Giving politicians a big new source of revenue, after all, would cripple any incentive for fiscal restraint.

To be blunt, imposing a big national sales tax – in addition to the income tax – would be a horrible defeat for advocates of limited government. A VAT would lead to more spending and more debt.

And that’s when folks might consider looking for escape options because America’s future will be very grim.

Here’s a video I narrated on why the value-added tax is awful public policy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6JDpw8a2Hk

Thankfully, I’m not the only one raising the alarm.

In a recent editorial, the Wall Street Journal wisely opined on the huge downside risk of a value-added tax.

It’s the hottest trend among tax collectors, raising a gusher of revenue for spendthrift governments worldwide. …a new report from accounting firm Ernst & Young says that VAT “systems are spreading” around the world and “rates are rising.”

By the way, the comment about “rates are rising” is an understatement, as illustrated by the table prepared by the Heritage Foundation.

austerity-europe

Politicians love VATs both because they generate huge amounts of revenue and because the tax is hidden in the price of products and thus can be increased surreptitiously.

The WSJ explains.

The VAT is a sort of turbo-charged national sales tax on goods and services… Politicians love it because it is the most efficient revenue-raiser known to man, and its rates can be raised gradually to finance new entitlements or fill budget holes. The VAT is typically introduced with a low rate but then moves up over time until it swallows huge chunks of national economies. …Because VATs are embedded in the price of products, they can often rise unnoticed by the consumer, which is why liberals love them as a vehicle for periodic stealth tax hikes.

And in this case, “periodic” is just another way of saying “whenever politician want more money.”

And if recent history is any indication, “whenever” is “all the time.”

E&Y says standard VAT rates now average a knee-buckling 21.6% in the European Union, up from 19.4% in 2008. Average standard rates in the industrial countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development have climbed to 19.2% from 17.8% in 2009. Japan is another example of the VAT upward ratchet. The Liberal Democratic Party tried to introduce the tax for years and finally succeeded with a 3% rate in 1989. Eight years later the shoguns raised it to 5%. Last year it climbed to 8%, whacking consumption and sending the economy back to negative growth.

The Japanese experience is especially educational since the VAT is a relatively new tax in that nation.

And here’s a chart showing what’s happened in the past few years to the average VAT rate in the European Union.

vat-eu-increase

Now let’s look at another chart that is far more worrisome.

It shows that the burden of government spending in Europe, before VATs were adopted, wasn’t that much different than the fiscal burden of the public sector in the United States.

But once the VAT gave politicians a new source of revenue, spending exploded.

vat-and-govt-spending-in-eu

VAT and government spending in the European Union.

By the way, you won’t be surprised to learn that politicians increased spending even more  than they increased taxes.

So not only did VATs lead to more spending, they also led to more debt. I guess that’s a win-win from the perspective of statists.

Let’s now return to the WSJ editorial. Proponents sometimes claim that VATs are neutral and efficient. That may be somewhat true in theory (just as an income tax, in theory, might be clean and simple), but in the real world, VATs simply make it possible for politicians to auction off a new source of loopholes.

…while VAT systems are often presented as models of simplicity that theoretically treat all goods and services alike, politicians can’t resist picking winners and losers, creating higher or lower rates for industries at their whim. “The politicians always start running with exemptions,” says E&Y’s Gijsbert Bulk.

Here’s the bottom line.

Americans, be warned. …don’t think it can’t happen here. Liberals campaign on soaking the rich, but they know there’s only so many rich to soak. To finance the growing entitlement state, they need a new broad-based tax that hits the middle class, where the big money is. That means either a VAT or a new energy tax, like the BTU tax Bill and Hillary Clinton proposed in 1993 or the cap-and-tax scheme that President Obama wanted.

The WSJ is correct. We need to be vigilant in the fight against the VAT.

But what makes this battle difficult is that some putative allies are on the wrong side.

Tom Dolan, Greg Mankiw, and Paul Ryan have all expressed pro-VAT sympathies. The same is true of Kevin Williamson, Josh Barro, and Andrew Stuttaford.

And I’ve written that Mitch Daniels, Herman Cain, and Mitt Romney were not overly attractive presidential candidates because they expressed openness to the VAT.

P.S. Some of you may be asking why leftists are so anxious for a VAT since they traditionally prefer class-warfare based tax hikes that extract revenue from the rich.

But here’s one of the dirty secrets of Washington. They may not admit it in public, but sensible leftists understand that there are Laffer-Curve constraints on extracting more revenue from upper-income taxpayers.

They’re familiar with the evidence from the 1980s about the sometimes-inverse link between tax rates and tax revenue and they are aware that “rich” people have substantial control over the timing, level, and composition of their income.

So if you want to collect more money, you have to go over lower-income and middle-income taxpayer.

Which is exactly what the IMF inadvertently revealed in a study showing that VATs are the “effective” way of financing bigger government.

imf-anti-vat-data

Source: International Monetary Fund

P.P.S. I should have written that leftists generally don’t admit that they want higher taxes on the general population. Because every so often, some of them confess that their goal is to rape and pillage the middle class.

P.P.P.S. You can enjoy some good VAT cartoons by clicking here, here, and here.

To be blunt, imposing a national VAT

paul-krugman

Liberal-progressive, left-wing economist Paul Krugman is actually paid $25,000 per month to talk, write, research and harp about “income inequality.”

I don’t know which group is more despicable, Greek politicians or the voters who elected them. In both cases, they think they’re entitled to other people’s money.

But since the “other people” in this case happen to live in nations such as Germany and Finland, and those folks don’t want to write blank checks to a bunch of moochers and looters, Greece faces a difficult choice.

Either the Greeks behave like adults and rein in their bloated public sector. Or they throw a tantrum, which presumably means both a default on payments to bondholders and a return to the unstable drachma currency.

My guess is they’ll eventually go with the latter option.

But maybe there’s hope for Greece. One of the Prime Minister’s chief economic advisers, an out-of-the-closet communist, has announced his resignation. Here are a few of the details from a story in the EU Observer.

Giannis Milios, a member of Syriza’s central committee and long time economic advisor to Greek prime minister Alexis Tsipras, resigned Wednesday… A professor of economic policy who defines himself as a Marxist, Milios is considered one of the most loyal members of the left-wing party.

So does this signal a shift to more mature and sensible policy?

Perhaps not. According to an article in the Wall Street Journal, the problem in Greece isn’t really the communists. It’s the American leftists like Paul Krugman!

Germany, many other governments and senior policy makers in Brussels believe…that recklessness has been encouraged by misguided political and economic philosophies and bad advice from abroad. It isn’t so much that many in Mr. Tsipras’s Syriza party are Marxists—the eurozone can handle followers of the bearded 19th-century German philosopher. It is more that they are seen to be excessively influenced by a 20th-century British economist—John Maynard Keynes—and his living Anglo-Saxon disciples. At finance ministers’ meetings in Brussels, Mr. Varoufakis has been accompanied by American economists James Galbraith and Jeffrey Sachs. From across the Atlantic, the new government gets strong rhetorical backing from Paul Krugman, Joseph Stiglitz and others.

Wow, this is remarkable. Who would have guessed that run-of-the-mill American leftists are more damaging to economic policy than communists!

I guess this is because the Marxists are probably harmless crazies who hang out in coffee houses and gripe about the capitalist class.

The American leftists like Krugman, by contrast, do real damage because they use discredited Keynesian theory to argue that politicians should be spending even more money to “stimulate” an economy that’s in a crisis because of previous bouts of government spending.

Sort of like trying to get out of a hole by digging even deeper.

What’s amazing is that Krugman and other American statists are pushing bad policy when there are successful examples of nations escaping fiscal crisis with genuine spending cuts.

John Dizard wrote an interesting article about Greece for the Financial Times. He began his article by quoting Krugman, who wrote that the plans of the crazy Greek government are “not radical enough.” Dizard also shared another quote from Krugman, which criticized proponents of lower spending because “the best the defenders of orthodoxy can do is point to a couple of small Baltic nations.”

So Dizard decided to compare Greece with those Baltic nations of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.

There are…some practical lessons to learn from…the contrasting ways that Greece has dealt with the world after the global financial crisis compared with the relatively poor Baltic states. Greece took a path of gradual fiscal adjustments weighted towards tax increases, accompanied by a partial debt default. The Baltic states adopted rapid and deep cuts in their state expenditure and current account deficits.

And here’s a shocking bit of news, though it won’t be surprise to folks in the real world. The Baltics have done far better.

The big issue in the Baltic states is upward wage pressure from tight labour markets. That is what we call a high-class problem. This understates the Baltic countries’ achievements. …They also did this without much benefit from concessionary multilateral finance or international debt haircuts.

Dizard looks at some of the differences between the Baltic nations and Greece.

There were virtually no dismissals from the Greek civil service over this period. Salaries were cut, but public sector staffing was reduced with lay-offs of temporary contract workers and early retirements. This had the effect of reducing already low service levels and transferring costs from payrolls to pension obligations. Latvia fired one-third of its civil servants. …The tax burden [in Greece] on salaried workers, compliant domestic businesses and property owners was substantially increased. In contrast, the Baltic states have fairly flat and relatively low tax rates.

All this is music to my ears since I’ve already written about the successful spending cuts in the Baltic countries.

And I particularly enjoyed having the opportunity, back in 2012, to correct the record when Krugman tried to blame Estonia’s 2008 recession on spending cuts that occurred in 2009.

P.S. Since today’s column focused on the statist ideas of Paul Krugman and because he’s a leading voice for the notion that more government spending somehow “stimulates” growth, I can’t resist sharing an explanation of Keynesian economics I gave back in 2009 as part of some remarks to Colorado’s Steamboat Institute.

Feel free to watch the whole video, but fast forward to 3:30 if you’re pressed for time. I’m being snarky, of course, but I also think my debunking of so-called stimulus is spot on.

P.P.S. By the way, the above video is from the Q&A portion of my remarks. If you watch my my actual speech, and if you pay attention about the 1:35 mark, you’ll see I was talking about the importance of having government grow slower than the economy’s productive sector back in 2009 even though I didn’t unveil Mitchell’s Golden Rule until two years later.

P.P.P.S. Since we’re picking on Krugman, here’s something that’s making the rounds on Twitter.

Good ol’ Professor Krugman praised the European approach of bigger government back in 2010, and everything that’s happened since that point has made his assessment look foolish.

Sort of reminds me of the time he attacked me for my gloomy assessment of California and claimed that the Golden State’s job market was strong. But it turns out that California had the 5th-highest unemployment rate in the nation.

P.P.P.P.S. Let’s close with the observation that the mess in Greece shouldn’t be blamed on Krugman. Sure, he’s giving bad advice, but Greek politicians deserve the lion’s share of the blame. Moreover, to the extent that outside advisers get blamed, we should remember that economists like Joseph Stiglitz and Jeffrey Sachs also are involved, and in some cases exercising more influence than Krugman.

CATO Institute economists and PPD contributor Dan

school-choice

A young girl in Douglas County (Colorado Springs) protests the legal challenge to a pilot voucher program, school choice program implemented by the then-newly elected conservative school board.

No other nation in the world spends as much on education as the United States. According to our leftist friends, who prefer to measure inputs rather than outputs, this is a cause for celebration. I guess it shows we have the best intentions. Or maybe we love our kids the most.

For those who prefer to focus on outputs, however, it’s very difficult to be happy about the results we’re getting compared to all the money that’s being spent. Heck, in some cases it’s almost as if we’re getting negative results when you compare inputs and outputs.

public school trends

Source: CATO

To paraphrase what Winston Churchill said about the Royal Air Force in World War II, never have so many paid so much to achieve so little.

Now we have more evidence that American taxpayers are paying a lot and getting a little (though I have to admit that non-teaching education bureaucrats have been big winners).

The Washington Post reports on some new research to see how America’s young adults rank compared to their peers in other nations.

The results aren’t encouraging.

This exam, given in 23 countries, assessed the thinking abilities and workplace skills of adults. It focused on literacy, math and technological problem-solving. The goal was to figure out how prepared people are to work in a complex, modern society. And U.S. millennials performed horribly. That might even be an understatement… No matter how you sliced the data – by class, by race, by education – young Americans were laggards compared to their international peers. In every subject, U.S. millennials ranked at the bottom or very close to it, according to a new study by testing company ETS.

There were three testing categories and Americans didn’t do well in any of them.

…in literacy, U.S. millennials scored higher than only three countries. In math, Americans ranked last. In technical problem-saving, they were second from the bottom. “Abysmal,” noted ETS researcher Madeline Goodman. “There was just no place where we performed well.”

Here’s the comparative data on literacy.

Here’s how Americans did on numeracy (which may explain why there’sconsiderable support for the minimum wage).

Last but not least, millennials didn’t exactly do well in problem solving, either (which may explain their bizarre answers to polling questions).

By the way, the researchers also sliced and diced the data to get apples-to-apples comparisons.

Yet even on this basis, there’s no good news for America.

U.S. millennials with master’s degrees and doctorates did better than their peers in only three countries, Ireland, Poland and Spain. …Top-scoring U.S. millennials – the 90th percentile on the PIAAC test – were at the bottom internationally, ranking higher only than their peers in Spain.  …ETS researchers tried looking for signs of promise – especially in math skills, which they considered a good sign of labor market success. They singled out native-born Americans. Nope.

At some point, we need to realize that decades of additional spending and decades of further centralization have not worked.

Maybe, just maybe, it’s time to shut down the Department of Education on the federal level and to encourage school choice on the state and local level.

After all, we already have good evidence that decentralization and competition produces better test scores. There’s also strong evidence for school choice from nations such as Sweden, Chile, and the Netherlands.

P.S. We’re never going to solve this problem by tinkering with the status quo. That’s like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. This is why Bush’s no-bureaucrat-left-behind scheme didn’t work. And it explains why Obama’s Common Core is flopping as well.

P.P.S. Moreover, it will probably require big reform to deal with the brainless types of political correctness that exist in government schools.

P.P.P.S. If you want more evidence that the problem isn’t money, check out this research on educational outcomes in various cities. Or look at this data from New York City and Washington, DC, both of which spend record amounts of money on education.

P.P.P.P.S. I can’t resist sharing this correction of some very shoddy education reporting by the New York Times.

P.P.P.P.P.S. On the bright side, the inadequacies of government-run schools helped give birth to the home-schooling movement, which then led to this humorous video. And the political correctness that infects government schools results in a bizarre infatuation with gender performance, which helped lead to this funny video. And this bit of satire on the evolution of math training in government schools also is quite amusing.

 

According to the left, spending on public

american-flag-islam-crescent

File: A generic image of the American flag with the crescent of Islam superimposed. (Photo: CBS News)

Students at Pine Bush High School in Pine Bush, New York, are outraged after the Pledge of Allegiance was recited in Arabic over the intercom Wednesday morning. Now, the backlash is spreading quickly beginning with outrage from upstate New York residents to disbelief across the nation.

“One nation under Allah,” the student body president announced over the school’s intercom on Wednesday.

The Times Herald-Record, first reported furious students tried to shout down the recitation in their classrooms, while other students sat down in silent protest.

School Superintendent Joan Carbone told the newspaper that the Arabic pledge “divided the school in half,” noting that many complaints came from Jewish parents and those who had lost family members fighting the war on terror.

The reaction among students was so negative and significant that the school issued an apology, vowing the Pledge of Allegiance with only be recited in English from now on.

“We sincerely apologize for having the Pledge of Allegiance recited this morning in the high school in a language other than English,” the apology read. “In our school district the Pledge of Allegiance will only be recited in English as recommended by the Commissioner of Education.”

Yet, in truth, state regulations do not mandate that the Pledge be recited in a specific language, but rather recommends specific wording.

108.5 Pledge to the flag.

(a) It is recommended that schools use the following pledge to the flag:

“I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”

(b) In giving the pledge to the flag, the procedure is to render the pledge by standing with the right hand over the heart.

But for the students, whether the Pledge should be recited in English or another language is a no-brainer.

“I think it should be said in English,” student Alex Krug told television station TWCNews.com. “It is foreign language week but we don’t even offer Arabic in Pine Bush High School.”

[caption id="attachment_23732" align="aligncenter" width="630"] File: A generic

Hillary-email-AP

FILE — March 10, 2015: Hillary Rodham Clinton listens during a news conference at United Nations headquarters. (AP Photo/Seth Wenig)

The email controversy surrounding former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has taken a significant toll on the once-presumptive 2016 Democratic nominee. Perhaps, in reality, it is far more fair of an assessment to say that Clinton’s reaction to the controversy is behind the shift in public opinion, a shift that is beginning to terrify national Democrats.

First, let’s take a look at the data from two new polls, then recap the events that are behind her precipitating numbers. The biggest concern Democrats should have is that — although her numbers have fallen across-the-board — Democrats are still willing to nominate a candidate that could find the general election waters chilly, indeed.

In their first survey since the email controversy, Rasmussen Reports found 48 percent of all likely voters have a favorable opinion of Hillary Clinton, while 49 percent view her unfavorably. While Rasmussen doesn’t score particularly high on PPD’s Pollster Scorecard, they routinely track the former first lady’s favorable numbers, and have never found her underwater. Her current favorable numbers are down from September, when 53 percent viewed Clinton favorably to 45 percent who viewed her unfavorably, and down significantly from 61 percent in December 2012.

Speaking to voter turnout, the intensity index is also against Clinton, with those numbers including only 21 percent with a “very favorable” view and 33 percent with a “very unfavorable” one. Worse still, 56 percent of all nonaffiliated voters view Clinton unfavorably, including 34 percent with a “very unfavorable” view.

There are real concerns within Democratic circles that extraordinary minority turnout may have been an Obama phenomena, and with only 65 percent of blacks and 56 percent of other minority voters having a favorable view of Hillary, those fears seem valid. A majority of whites — 54 percent — already hold an unfavorable opinion of her.

Say what you will about Rasmussen, but they are not alone.

Support for Clinton’s candidacy has plunged 15 percentage points since mid-February among Democrats, with as few as 45 percent saying they would support her in the latest Reuters/Ipsos tracking poll. Nearly half of Democratic respondents – 46 percent – said there should be an independent review of all of Clinton’s emails, with 41 percent saying they backed Republicans’ efforts to force Clinton to testify.

Both polls also show Clinton’s support among voters of her own party waning, yet still enough to be seen as the primary favorite. While most voters — 54 percent — think the Democratic Party should look for a new face in 2016, a plurality (44 percent) of Democrats believes the party should promote a candidate who has already run in the past, though a growing 36 percent are looking for a newcomer.

Democrats, increasingly, are facing the danger 2016 could be labeled a “future versus past” narrative, particularly if Republicans DO NOT election former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush. A majority of unaffiliated voters — 58 percent — now say the Democratic Party should find someone new to run in 2016.

One of Hillary’s biggest problems is not only that Americans are paying attention, but that they don’t like the déjà vu they are seeing. The Reuters/Ipsos poll showed that Americans, including two-thirds of Democrats, were aware of the email controversy.

About half of Democrats said they thought Clinton was composed during the March 10 news conference, but 14 percent said they thought she was evasive and another 17 percent said she flat-out avoided answering questions.

Even if Hillary survives the email scandal, which will almost certainly require there being “no there, there,” her troubles don’t end with the recent email controversy, or her response that was perceived by voters as entitled and combative.

While voters have national security concerns about Clinton’s email habits, they find the large donations made to the Clinton Foundation by foreign governments more troubling than the email controversy. Roughly half were concerned about the emails in the immediate wake of the story, but 57 percent didn’t like what they were smelling when they heard of the foreign donations, the story Democratic operatives are most concerned with, as well.

To be fair, the same is true for Republicans if they nominate a Bush, which PPD previously examined. However, the number of controversies and degree to which they are known is not an apparent problem for any of the prospective GOP hopefuls — yet.

We have been tracking the impact of the Benghazi terror attack on public opinion since May 2013, when Quinnipiac University measured the first marked hit to her favorables from the details surrounding the attack. In January 2014, 46 percent said they believed it would hurt her 2016 chances. In May 2014, a majority of Americans first said they believed she lied about the events and her role.

Now, more voters than ever before think the circumstances surrounding the murder of the U.S. ambassador and three other U.S. Embassy employees in Benghazi will hurt Clinton’s 2016 bid.

That may be a lot to digest at once but it is food for thought, for Democratic primary voters.

The Rasmussen Reports survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted from March 16 to March 17, 2015. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

The Reuters/Ipsos online poll of 2,128 adults was conducted from March 10 to March 17, 2015. The margin of sampling error is +/- 2.5 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

The email controversy surrounding former Secretary of

tunisia-museum-attack

Authorities evacuate the museum in Tunis after Islamic militants targeted westerners, killing 21 people.

The Islamic State (IS) has claimed responsibility for the Bardo National Museum attack in Tunis on Wednesday that claimed the lives of 21 people and injured 47 others.

On Thursday, the group’s media arm released a statement listing the names of the attackers as Abu Zakaria al Tunisi and Abu Anas al Tunisi, aliases for Hatem Khachnaou and Yassine Labidi, who were killed by Tunisian security officials during the onslaught.

Intelligence officials say they knew of Labidi, but neither he nor Khachnaou had any known links to terrorist organizations in Tunisia, let alone the Islamic State. The statement also heavily criticized the country’s secularist system, claiming its leaders had made Tunisia seem like a “hotbed for their disbelief and debauchery.”

Tunisia was the birthplace of the so-called Arab Spring, and an example of a Arab-led Middle East government that resembles a democracy.

U.S. officials say the statement appears to be authentic, but have yet to determine if ISIS was in fact involved in the attack or only responsible.

In an interview with a French radio station, Prime Minister Habib Essid said Tunisian authorities are working alongside other governments to piece together the attackers’ motives and history. But witnesses say the militants told Muslims in Arabic to put their head down in order for them to distinguish between westerners and Muslims. A whopping 18 of the 21 victims were foreigners.

The Tunisian military is also receiving equipment from its allies, including helicopters for night surveillance, including UH-60M Black Hawk helicopters wholesale from the United States.

Tunisian authorities have thus far arrested nine people linked to Wednesday’s attack.

“Security forces were able to arrest four people directly linked to the [terrorist] operation and five suspected of having ties to the cell,” Tunisian President Beji Caid Essebsi said in a statement on Thursday.

President Essebsi is sending soldiers to protect the country’s biggest cities, which is part of his prior promise to counter insurgencies on the borders. But he also met with police and army leaders and the parliament to signal that he will back a new anti-terrorism law in a country that is extremely concerned that its economy, which is heavily dependent on European tourism and investment, will suffer in the wake of the attacks.

“I want the Tunisian people to understand that we are in a war against terrorism and that these savage minorities do not frighten us,” said President Essebsi, adding that Tunisia would fight “to our last breath.”

The Italian cruise line Costa Crociere has already cancelled all stops at Tunisian ports due to security concerns. Overall, tourism accounts for some 7 percent of the country’s GDP.

The Islamic State (ISIS) has claimed responsibility

yemen-terror-attack

At least 46 were killed and hundreds injured in the attacks on two mosques. (Photo: Reuters)

BREAKING: At least 130 people were killed in suicide bombings at two mosques during midday prayers Friday in the Yemeni capital of Sanaa amid fighting between Islam’s two major sects. Officials are claiming that at least 300 were injured in the attack.

(UPDATE: Prior reports suggested death toll was 47)

According to witnesses, at least four suicide bombers blew themselves up in the mosques, which are used by Shiite Muslim Houthis, the Iranian-backed group that seized control of the government in late January. The attacks reportedly also left hundreds injured, and apparently were conducted in conjunction with an assault on the presidential palace.

Worshippers were attending noon prayers at the Badr and al-Hashoosh mosques in Sanaa when the attacks were perpetrated,with one witness telling The Associated Press he was in the al-Hashoosh mosque, located in Sanaa’s northern district, when he was thrown two meters away by the blast.

“The heads, legs and arms of the dead people were scattered on the floor of the mosque,” Mohammed al-Ansi said, adding, “blood is running like a river.”

Al-Ansi said that many of those who didn’t die in the explosion were seriously injured by shattered glass falling from the mosque’s windows. He said he was running for the exit with other survivors when he hearded one man screaming, “come back, save the injured!”

While no group immediately claimed responsibility for the attacks, officials suspect al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, or AQAP, as the attacks bore hallmarks of prior al Qaeda bombings. However, ISIS-affiliates on social media claimed that the group carried out the bombing.

If true, it would be its first major attack in Yemen by the Islamic State, and potentially indicate the group working with AQAP as they have done with Boko Haram in recent weeks.

The northern-based Houthi rebels backed by Iran seized control of Sanaa last September and in late January, forcing President President Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi and the entire government, including Prime Minister Khaled Bahah, to resign after submitting to house arrest.

The U.S. was forced to evacuate its embassy soon after, carelessly leaving a secure classified connection up and running. As PPD previously reported, the Obama administration believed it had hatched a deal with Iran to leave the embassy open in order to conduct counter-terror operations against AQAP, but they got swindled.

The bombings came a day after deadly clashes in the southern city of Aden, between forces loyal to President Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi and the Houthi supporters of his predecessor, Ali Abdullah Saleh, who was ousted in 2011 after mass protects in the so-called Arab Spring. Now, he is allied with the Shiite Houthis, the very group he had previously fought wars against while in power.

Warplanes struck the presidential palace in Aden, where Hadi has been holed up since fleeing the capital of Sanaa February. Hadi, who aides confirmed had been evacuated to a “safe place” after the air strikes, called the Aden attack part of a “failed military coup against constitutional legitimacy.”

The Houthis now control at least nine of Yemen’s 21 provinces.

The attack is the latest example of instability in the region since the kick off of the Arab Spring, a movement that began in Tunisia in 2010 and swept throughout the Muslim world. Initially, those rebelling promised to bring democracy to nations under Islamist dictatorships, which was supported by the Obama administration. However, it has proven a gross and dangerous failure, with violence now plaguing Tunisia, where two gunmen killed 23 people at a museum Wednesday.

The Islamic State claimed credit for the attack.

At least 46 people were killed in

John Kerry, Mohammad Javad Zarif

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, second from left, meets with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, second from right, for a new round of nuclear negotiations Wednesday, March 4, 2015, in Montreux, Switzerland. (Photo: AP/Evan Vucci, Pool)

While Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has garnered the headlines opposing the Iran deal, Arab allies in the Middle East are sounding the alarm following a report leaking the details of the framework negotiations.

The U.S. and Iran are closing in on a nuclear deal that only requires Tehran make a 40 percent cut to the number of machines it could use to make an atomic bomb, officials told The Associated Press on Thursday. In return, the Iranians would get substantial economic relief from some crippling sanctions and a partial lift of a U.N. embargo on conventional arms, all of which brought them to the negotiation table in the first place.

Iran will not have to prove a change in behavior, nor have they been cooperating with oversight efforts by the United Nations Atomic Energy Agency.

Diplomats from both sides are racing to meet a March 31 deadline for a framework agreement and a final must be made by the end of June, but lawmakers and Middle East allies agree these terms will leave the world’s foremost state-sponsor of terrorism a threshold nuclear power.

“This is not the kind of deal we can live with,” an aide to the late Saudi King Abdullah told PPD. “We can’t live with the terms of this deal as report.”

The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media, told PPD that the number of centrifuges reported by the Associated Press is indeed what the Saudi government has been told to accept by Washington.

But that’s just not acceptable to the Saudi government, who grow weary of the Obama administration’s motives regarding Iran and its proxy regimes in the Middle East, including in Syria and Yemen.

The AP reported the deal would limit the number of centrifuges Iran can operate to enrich uranium to a significant 6,000 centrifuges, down even further from the 6,500 criticized in recent weeks. The deal also does indeed contain a sunset provision, which will cause the restrictions to expire in only a decade.

Tehran now runs 10,000 machines, but with restrictions on enrichment levels and the types of centrifuges Iran can use, Washington believes it can extend the time Tehran would need to produce a nuclear weapon to at least a year.

As of now, Iran would require only two to three months to amass enough material to make a bomb.

Meanwhile, Sen. Robert Corker, R-Tenn., the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said he would move forward with legislation requiring President Obama to get the approval of the Senate before agreeing to any nuclear deal. The legislation, by some estimates, is just one Democratic vote away from achieving a veto-proof majority, while 360 House Republicans and Democrats — more than enough to override a presidential veto — sent a letter to Obama saying if an agreement is reached, Congress will decide on easing sanctions it has imposed.

“Congress must be convinced that its terms foreclose any pathway to a bomb, and only then will Congress be able to consider permanent sanctions relief,” the lawmakers wrote.

Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y., ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, told administration officials at a hearing Thursday that the president will not skirt lawmakers and “any attempts to sidestep Congress will be resisted on both sides of the aisle.”

According to Saudi officials, they have spoken with the Arab world’s largest nation, Egypt, who also expressed concern over the deal. While restrictions on the transfer of missile technology will stay as a part of the deal, they say Iran’s long range missile capability presents the Shiite regime with a delivery system that poses a grave threat to their Sunni neighbors across the Gulf.

After the deal expires, Iran could easily increase enrichment activity to any level, quickly developing an actual bomb to use with an already developed delivery system.

Iran already can produce the equivalent of one weapon’s worth of enriched uranium with the centrifuges it now runs. However, Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, spoke of eventually operating enough centrifuges to produce what 190,000 of its current models churn out.

Arab allies in the Middle East are

(Photo: Reuters)

Factory growth activity in the U.S. mid-Atlantic region fell for a fourth straight month in March and now sits at its lowest level in more than a year, according to the Philadelphia Federal Reserve survey released on Thursday.

The Philadelphia Federal Reserve Bank’s Manufacturing Business Outlook Survey (MBOS)showed  business activity index fell to 5.0 this month, which is the lowest since February 2014, down from February’s 5.2.

Economists polled by Reuters had forecast an increase to 7.1, but any reading above zero indicates expansion in the region’s manufacturing. In other words, the survey is in danger of falling in to contraction territory. The survey covers factories in eastern Pennsylvania, southern New Jersey and Delaware.

It is seen as one of the first monthly indicators of the health of U.S. manufacturing leading up to the national report by the Institute for Supply Management.

Just four months ago, in November, the Philadelphia Fed gauge had notched its highest reading since December 1993, but has fallen each month since then.

Factory growth activity in the U.S. mid-Atlantic

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