printI’m still coming to grips with the reality of Europe being more fiscally prudent than the US. An American (who else?) think-tank head has framed the European opposition to Obama’s obscene deficit/bankruptcy/inflationary spending, with reference to “a certain backlash against the American economic model,” hubris I find difficult to parse. Such “vulgar Keynesianism” is not a model; it’s a crime!
I worry that Obama will work his magic on Merkel and the rest and convince them to adopt his voodoo economics. Then there really will be no place to run. A pied piper will have enticed the world over a cliff … (And I have family in Europe.)
Chancellor Angela Merkel, to her great credit, has said “Nein” to stimulus and bailouts. Disparagingly, American diplomats put it down to combined “profound German instinct against debt – and its accompanying inflation – with a widely held sentiment here that the US and Wall Street are to blame for creating the global crisis.”
Can’t argue with the Chancellor, can you?!
Obama departed today for London, in advance of the Group of 20 Summit there. Reports The Christian Science Monitor:
“The White House recently signaled it has all but given up hope that the leaders Obama meets this week will make major commitments along the lines the US would like to see – either in terms of big spending packages for the economy or of additional troops or resources for Afghanistan.”
“Obama is expected to encounter an adoring public but a deep skepticism – even resistance – among heads of state.” …
“How well Mr. Obama can parlay his personal popularity into convincing leadership is a key question hanging over his global coming-out party. With many leaders blaming the United States for planting the seeds of the first global recession since World War II, America’s ability to continue as the world’s unrivaled power, whether in economic or other matters, is likely to be an undercurrent of meetings with the G-20 leaders, NATO, and in bilateral meetings with his counterparts.”
[SNIP]
As to “A War He Can Call His Own”; that’s old. Obama has always wanted to “maintain a meaty presence in Afghanistan, and “may even be conjuring up new monsters and new missions” we don’t know of yet. Europeans don’t like that; Demopublican globalists stateside do.
Update (April 1): Naturally, realize we must that, while Nicolas Sarkozy and Angela Merkel must be lauded for not wishing to take their respective countries down the road to ruin Obama has set us upon; the two European leaders are still only half as bad as Obama.
Both are working from the premise that unbridled capitalism, the system that has almost never been tried—the Unknown Ideal in Ayn Rand’s words—is the culprit in the meltdown.
The man who married a bimbo said he aims “to give capitalism a conscience, because capitalism has lost its conscience.” “This is a historic and unique opportunity to build a new world,” he added.
Brother Obama is down with that fallacy. So while Europeans will not heed him in as much as spending goes, they will find common grounds “on tax havens, hedge fund regulation, banking transparency and a worldwide cap on bankers’ pay.”
However crippling to capital markets and to financial freedom these and other draconian measure agreed upon in Europe will be—they do not rival the damage of bankruptcy.
Thanks to The Leader the American people elected, here in the US, we’ll be the beneficiaries of a double dose of poison: international regulation, with its attendant implications for national sovereignty, and bankruptcy.
Joy!
Note: Obama is hip to the fact that “United States was unlikely to return to its role as a ‘voracious consumer market.’” That much is true.
I hope the Europeans embarrass Obama. He deserves it. Obama is going to go over there and talk and preach. I hope the Europeans won’t put up with it.
And don’t let Obama sell you any US Treasury notes either, Europe.
I can’t understand people’s attraction to Obama. He lacks the charisma of a Bill Clinton or the self-effacing humor of a Ronald Reagan. His grasp of history, finance, and economics is laughable. And take away the TelePromter and he becomes a babbling idiot.
One certainly can’t point to any legitimate policy change from his disastrous predecessor. It’s more of the same, only worse.
It should be painfully clear to everyone by now that he’s leading America off a cliff. Why would any foreign leader be stupid enough to hitch his wagon to the Obama trainwreck?
A winning strategy: listen to what Obama says and do the polar opposite.
[Occasionally he is quite funny; and he does seem an affable fellow.]
Ilana writes: “I’m still coming to grips with the reality of Europe being more fiscally prudent than the US.” Me, too! Who’d have “thunk” it, even two years ago? After all, Europeans were supposed to be horrible socialists while we Americans were otherwise.
Time tells a lot of things, and it’s not too surprising that the German chancellor articulates her objection to Keynsianism based on what is referred to as a cultural trait—Teutonic aversion to debt—that should not be disparaged by anyone. The fact is, however, that America’s pre-eminence as world leader has _already_ been undercut by our massive debt; what may or may not happen at this G-20 meeting does not cause this situation, but makes it appear more prominent.
Too bad, in the extreme, that we spent ourselves into oblivion under the Bush administration, whose biggest spending blunder was the “global crusade for democracy” underlying the Iraq War. (You can find ample “justification” in the speeches of Lincoln.) As an American Christian, I deeply regret that so many of my co-religionists gave Bush a pass on this issue. I just wish they’d studied the Constitution before offering support.
“The United States will swing far to the left while the Right consolidates control over every European government (save for the U.K. and Portugal)” If someone told you that 5 years ago you’d think they were mad, but this is exactly what has happened. Will a prudent centre-right EU emerge as the new world leader? We certainly do live in interesting times.
(1) There is an excellent article on Afghanistan:
http://www.counterpunch.org/lind03312009.html
Ironically, it is claimed that 95% of Afghans hate the Taliban – if that is the case, why not do the “Archie Bunker solution” – buy every Afghan an AK-47 and some ammo and get out. The “good” Afghans will then slaughter the “bad” Afghans if that is the case.
(2) The irony of economic regulation is that the more one regulates/stifles relatively “safe” investments, the more people will flock to the remaining deregulated (but more risky) investments – as was the case in the last decade. (3) Maybe it is my perception but Obama’s credibility seems to be tanking faster than the market – from Messiah to irrelevant bloviator in the first 100 days.
These are interesting times indeed. How about these recent Drudge Report headlines:
4/2/09: “World markets surge as US data boost recovery hope…
8000? Wall St rallies…”
3/30/09: “Russia backs return to Gold Standard…”
(Alas. Methinks all is not what it seems to be.)
It would appear that part of the G20’s “solution” is more regulation (shocking!), a crackdown on tax havens (people attempting to keep their own property), and a greater role and a bigger budget for the IMF. Great. Just great.
The IMF is a global agency populated by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats – many of whom know nothing about how wealth is produced. What could possibly go wrong with this plan?
And the additional $1.1 trillion they will get? Who picks up the tab for this?