There is a new technological revolution underway that will dramatically change our lives, much as the PC and the Internet did. It is called cloud computing.
There is a fierce battle over control of this turf, with trillions of dollars at stake. With the growth of computer usage, the explosion of app software, the increasing speed of the Internet and the ubiquitous use of wireless devices, the world is primed for this revolution, with unlimited potential demand, with fortune to the victors and failure to the losers.
Cloud computing allows us all to access superfast computer from anywhere. Just as I am writing this blog from a theater in Brockton, Mass, as I wait to see my daughters dance, I could be crunching numbers on a supercomputer with my Blackberry, using my voice like a keyboard. No more waiting for my computer to boot up, no more backing up my data, no more having to load new software, no more having to purchase faster and faster hardware. Everything will be automated. Like Jack Trance in The Alchemist Conspiracy, The Varicose Vigilantes and The Presidential Pretender, we will all have access to unlimited speed and power. We can have eyeglasses that provide the screen and connection. Everything can be voice activated. No more having to carry around these bulky laptops. We will still have screens that are as big as our laptops, but they will be holographic and will fit into a container no bigger and no more bulky than a small pen.
Needless to say, the battle for dominance in this arena is fierce. As the industry struggles to create standards and mobility between providers, the dominant early players are resisting. I see a new epic battle brewing, like Apple vs. Microsoft, Coke vs. Pepsi, Ford vs. Chevy or the Red Sox vs. the Yankees.
As I write this, the early leaders are Microsoft (no surprise) and Amazon. Look for companies like IBM, Google, AT&T and Verizon to join the fight in some way or another.
This is like the early days of the personal computer, when there were dozens of players, or automobiles, where there were more than a thousand car makers. In the end, though, only a few players, maybe even one, will matter.
This will all be happening at light speed, and it will usher in a whole new wave of business productivity. That’s good, because the way our government is removing business freedom, we're going to need it.
www.lumbert.com
www.shaksperbooks.com
www.jaylumbert.com
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Friday, June 12, 2009
Will Obama Create Jimmy Carter-like Stagflation? Forever?
I am seeing very ominous signs that our nation is heading toward a period of stagflation quite similar to what we experienced during the administration of Jimmy Carter.
Our government has opened up the money spigot to help avoid a global financial collapse. This, in itself, will be inflationary. Flooding the markets with excess cash causes inflation. Simple math.
Much of last year’s monetary action had to be implemented, particularly the actions by the Fed, in order to avert a true global meltdown, not the hiccup we actually encountered.
At the same time, the current administration is creating spending plans that go far beyond our means to pay. We are talking $1 trillion - $2 trillion deficits for as far as the pencil can see. This will force our government to go to the capital markets to borrow huge sums of money. In order to attract capital, we will have to pay higher and higher interest to entice investors to risk owning our capital.
In order to maintain workable interest rates, the Fed will find itself “forced” to print more money. This will add to inflation and worsen the problem.
Our administration’s solution to our growing budget deficits is “health care reform.” This is code for higher taxes and greater expenses. Obama plans to (attempt to) tax medical benefits that are provided by employers to their employees. Such a tax might raise between $100 billion and $200 billion per year.
At the same time, Obama will seek to nationalize health care, by promising a more streamlined, less-costly delivery system. Anyone who spends ten minutes examining the health care systems of such countries as Britain, Canada and you-name-it, will find that government bureaucracy only bloats costs and creates inefficiencies. To manage spiraling costs, governments are forced to ration care. It will take years to get a hip transplant, provided you are young enough for the government to pay for it. Cancer treatments with low probabilities of success won’t get funded. And doctors who order the least amount of testing, the ones who send you home with a brain tumor telling you it is just a headache, will become the government’s preferred providers. Our health care will go from being the best in the world to among the worst.
Increasing taxes on companies and our nation’s citizens has never been an effective way to increase long-term revenues. Lowering tax rates is far more efficient in creating greater long-term government revenues. If you leave a dollar in the hands of someone who invests their money rather than spend it, the money creates wealth, jobs and (ultimately) greater taxes to the government.
I believe that a government must have compassion for its people. I believe in a safety net for all citizens. But I don’t believe that politicians in Washington are better at managing money than the average U.S. citizen. The free markets are far more efficient at providing essential services than the government could ever be.
Obama is seeking to grow our government at an unprecedented rate. He is doing this deceptively, and few citizens actually realize how massive this undertaking has become. Much of this is being done with excessive deficit spending that will drive interest rates higher and higher, at the same time that his taxes stifle growth.
Tim Geitner has warned our Congress that the proposed budget deficits are dangerous for our economy. As projected, it will take less than ten years for the U.S. to lose its AAA bond rating. When this happens, we will be forced to pay hundreds of billions more annually to service our national debt. This may put us over the point of no return, from where we can never recover.
If we don’t do something about government spending today, our children and grandchildren will live in an America that is far different than the one we enjoy. Our dollar will buy little. Goods will be increasingly expensive. Tax rates will exceed 80% at the highest levels. Good jobs will grow scarcer. The American Dream will have become more like the American Nightmare.
The United States is the most productive society in the history of the planet. We enjoy the highest standard of living that the world has ever seen. We became that way with freedom of choice and a low tax base.
Our government’s current policies are rapidly taking away our freedom and putting in place fiscal policies that will demand higher and higher taxes.
I assure you, this is not a reactionary tirade by a right-wing ideologue.
I have been both a republican and a democrat during my life. I vote for both parties. Because of my own personal experiences, I believe in a number of so-called “liberal” policies. I know what it is like to face oppressive roadblocks in life, to suffer at the hands of others with no way out. I have broken my back and my neck. I know what things outside of our control can do our lives. I have been the beneficiary of the kindness of others, and I know how important this can be. Unless you have been there, you simply don’t know.
Many “conservatives” preach about self-sufficiency. They don’t want government subsidies or preferences. On its face, this sounds fair. But life isn’t fair. Sometimes support from others, even the government, is needed to overcome disadvantages, to allow for equality. I do agree, that all too often, government does this inefficiently, but it must be done by any moral society.
Sometimes, the government can do things that the private sector will not do on its own. We must provide the capital to develop technologies that are too far in the future for smart companies to invest in. Why would Exxon invest billions in a technology that might provide energy thirty years from now? Personally, I would like to see our government sponsor an alternative energy program (including nuclear) similar to the Manhattan Project. We are headed toward $4 gas, far sooner than anyone realizes today.
Having some “liberal” needs and tendencies does not mean that our nation should act irresponsibly, and create problems that cannot be reversed without draconian pain. This is where our nation is heading at the moment.
If Congress does not step up and curb spending…if the Obama administration doesn’t get their head out of the clouds by thinking that a new government bureaucracy will create spending efficiencies…if Congress continues to think that higher taxes will solve these problems…we are in for a whole lot of pain. Big-time pain. Something that will make the current “global meltdown” look like the good ol’ days.
The Obama administration has taken a “financial crisis” and used it to help grow the size and power of the government. Our dominant media is doing little to educate the public on how serious the ramifications of our current government policies will be. Personally, I don’t think they understand it one bit. Everyone is being blinded by how “good” we can be, how “compassionate” we are and how “peaceful” we can be with our enemies. While all this is going on, our nation is heading toward Niagara Falls in a barrel.
Like a magician using sleight of hand, our government is rapidly taking away the nation we grew up in and replacing it with third-world socialism.
Unless we realize this soon, and take action, we will all get to experience the stagflation we faced during the Carter administration. Unfortunately, our nation’s finances will have eroded so far by then, that we may not be able to recover and get our nation back. Would you like to live in Russia today? I wouldn’t. But that’s the direction that our nation’s captain is trying to steer our national ship.
Our government has opened up the money spigot to help avoid a global financial collapse. This, in itself, will be inflationary. Flooding the markets with excess cash causes inflation. Simple math.
Much of last year’s monetary action had to be implemented, particularly the actions by the Fed, in order to avert a true global meltdown, not the hiccup we actually encountered.
At the same time, the current administration is creating spending plans that go far beyond our means to pay. We are talking $1 trillion - $2 trillion deficits for as far as the pencil can see. This will force our government to go to the capital markets to borrow huge sums of money. In order to attract capital, we will have to pay higher and higher interest to entice investors to risk owning our capital.
In order to maintain workable interest rates, the Fed will find itself “forced” to print more money. This will add to inflation and worsen the problem.
Our administration’s solution to our growing budget deficits is “health care reform.” This is code for higher taxes and greater expenses. Obama plans to (attempt to) tax medical benefits that are provided by employers to their employees. Such a tax might raise between $100 billion and $200 billion per year.
At the same time, Obama will seek to nationalize health care, by promising a more streamlined, less-costly delivery system. Anyone who spends ten minutes examining the health care systems of such countries as Britain, Canada and you-name-it, will find that government bureaucracy only bloats costs and creates inefficiencies. To manage spiraling costs, governments are forced to ration care. It will take years to get a hip transplant, provided you are young enough for the government to pay for it. Cancer treatments with low probabilities of success won’t get funded. And doctors who order the least amount of testing, the ones who send you home with a brain tumor telling you it is just a headache, will become the government’s preferred providers. Our health care will go from being the best in the world to among the worst.
Increasing taxes on companies and our nation’s citizens has never been an effective way to increase long-term revenues. Lowering tax rates is far more efficient in creating greater long-term government revenues. If you leave a dollar in the hands of someone who invests their money rather than spend it, the money creates wealth, jobs and (ultimately) greater taxes to the government.
I believe that a government must have compassion for its people. I believe in a safety net for all citizens. But I don’t believe that politicians in Washington are better at managing money than the average U.S. citizen. The free markets are far more efficient at providing essential services than the government could ever be.
Obama is seeking to grow our government at an unprecedented rate. He is doing this deceptively, and few citizens actually realize how massive this undertaking has become. Much of this is being done with excessive deficit spending that will drive interest rates higher and higher, at the same time that his taxes stifle growth.
Tim Geitner has warned our Congress that the proposed budget deficits are dangerous for our economy. As projected, it will take less than ten years for the U.S. to lose its AAA bond rating. When this happens, we will be forced to pay hundreds of billions more annually to service our national debt. This may put us over the point of no return, from where we can never recover.
If we don’t do something about government spending today, our children and grandchildren will live in an America that is far different than the one we enjoy. Our dollar will buy little. Goods will be increasingly expensive. Tax rates will exceed 80% at the highest levels. Good jobs will grow scarcer. The American Dream will have become more like the American Nightmare.
The United States is the most productive society in the history of the planet. We enjoy the highest standard of living that the world has ever seen. We became that way with freedom of choice and a low tax base.
Our government’s current policies are rapidly taking away our freedom and putting in place fiscal policies that will demand higher and higher taxes.
I assure you, this is not a reactionary tirade by a right-wing ideologue.
I have been both a republican and a democrat during my life. I vote for both parties. Because of my own personal experiences, I believe in a number of so-called “liberal” policies. I know what it is like to face oppressive roadblocks in life, to suffer at the hands of others with no way out. I have broken my back and my neck. I know what things outside of our control can do our lives. I have been the beneficiary of the kindness of others, and I know how important this can be. Unless you have been there, you simply don’t know.
Many “conservatives” preach about self-sufficiency. They don’t want government subsidies or preferences. On its face, this sounds fair. But life isn’t fair. Sometimes support from others, even the government, is needed to overcome disadvantages, to allow for equality. I do agree, that all too often, government does this inefficiently, but it must be done by any moral society.
Sometimes, the government can do things that the private sector will not do on its own. We must provide the capital to develop technologies that are too far in the future for smart companies to invest in. Why would Exxon invest billions in a technology that might provide energy thirty years from now? Personally, I would like to see our government sponsor an alternative energy program (including nuclear) similar to the Manhattan Project. We are headed toward $4 gas, far sooner than anyone realizes today.
Having some “liberal” needs and tendencies does not mean that our nation should act irresponsibly, and create problems that cannot be reversed without draconian pain. This is where our nation is heading at the moment.
If Congress does not step up and curb spending…if the Obama administration doesn’t get their head out of the clouds by thinking that a new government bureaucracy will create spending efficiencies…if Congress continues to think that higher taxes will solve these problems…we are in for a whole lot of pain. Big-time pain. Something that will make the current “global meltdown” look like the good ol’ days.
The Obama administration has taken a “financial crisis” and used it to help grow the size and power of the government. Our dominant media is doing little to educate the public on how serious the ramifications of our current government policies will be. Personally, I don’t think they understand it one bit. Everyone is being blinded by how “good” we can be, how “compassionate” we are and how “peaceful” we can be with our enemies. While all this is going on, our nation is heading toward Niagara Falls in a barrel.
Like a magician using sleight of hand, our government is rapidly taking away the nation we grew up in and replacing it with third-world socialism.
Unless we realize this soon, and take action, we will all get to experience the stagflation we faced during the Carter administration. Unfortunately, our nation’s finances will have eroded so far by then, that we may not be able to recover and get our nation back. Would you like to live in Russia today? I wouldn’t. But that’s the direction that our nation’s captain is trying to steer our national ship.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Obama Cap-and-Trade: A Tax We Can’t Afford
The Obama administration is backing a bill going through Congress (Waxman-Markey) that would cap U.S. Co2 emissions at 83% of 2005 levels by the year 2020.
While this is an idea that sounds good to the politician, it is a policy move that will severely tax the American people, it will cost American jobs and it will do little to reduce global carbon emissions.
The U.S. Congressional Budget Office has estimated that it will cost the average American household $1,600 per year to reduce CO2 emissions by 15%. American families are struggling as it is. It will increase the prices of American-made goods, causing us to lose more jobs. It will shift production overseas to countries (like China) that have no restrictions on CO2 emissions. It may even increase overall global Co2 emissions, the opposite of its intent.
At this time, U.S. carbon emissions represent about 25% of global emissions. A 15% reduction represents about a 4% drop in world CO2 emissions, assuming the products are still made in this country. However, the tax (yes, it is a tax) would cause more overseas production, in areas that pollute many times more than we do for the same output. The net result will be a lower U.S. wage base, more unemployment and no less global pollution.
In reality, this bill represents little more than a power grab by Washington, giving politicians the ability to trade CO2 credits for votes. Nothing more.
While this is an idea that sounds good to the politician, it is a policy move that will severely tax the American people, it will cost American jobs and it will do little to reduce global carbon emissions.
The U.S. Congressional Budget Office has estimated that it will cost the average American household $1,600 per year to reduce CO2 emissions by 15%. American families are struggling as it is. It will increase the prices of American-made goods, causing us to lose more jobs. It will shift production overseas to countries (like China) that have no restrictions on CO2 emissions. It may even increase overall global Co2 emissions, the opposite of its intent.
At this time, U.S. carbon emissions represent about 25% of global emissions. A 15% reduction represents about a 4% drop in world CO2 emissions, assuming the products are still made in this country. However, the tax (yes, it is a tax) would cause more overseas production, in areas that pollute many times more than we do for the same output. The net result will be a lower U.S. wage base, more unemployment and no less global pollution.
In reality, this bill represents little more than a power grab by Washington, giving politicians the ability to trade CO2 credits for votes. Nothing more.
Monday, June 1, 2009
GM Bankruptcy Another Union Payoff
General Motors went into a controlled bankruptcy today, with the government pledging another $30 Billion of our tax dollars to subsidize union labor. The unions have also become the company’s largest (apart from the government) shareholders.
GM’s union workers still receive close to $50,000 per year in higher pay (including benefits) than Honda, Toyota, Nissan & BMW, etc. workers in non-union states. I see nothing in the current negotiations that is going to significantly reduce that union labor cost below $150,000 per worker.
Anyone who buys a car, both new and used, must pay more because of this. We also need to pay more in taxes because of this. That’s where the bailout money comes from. And this $30 Billion will grow into $100 Billion (or more) before it is over.
What the government should do is to allow GM to hire non-union labor without the threat of a strike. This way, they will pay a fair wage, as determined by market forces, and they will once-again become competitive.
Each U.S. automaker must pay somewhere between $1,500 and $2,500 for each car in “legacy” and excess-labor costs, before the car even hits the assembly line. No wonder the U.S. makers can’t compete. If they were the only producers, they could pass the cost along and no one would be the wiser. Unfortunately for them, they must compete with other car makers, who don’t have these costs. When a car retails for $18,000 there is no profit margin when you add $2,500 to your costs.
The hidden plan is to bring about government health insurance. If the taxpayer picks up the insurance cost, the auto makers can reduce their legacy costs by about $1,000 per car.
While nationalized health care is being put forward as a “cost cutting” measure, it will do no such thing. Nothing done by the government is done at a lesser cost than the competitive, private sector.
While the rhetoric for nationalized medicine sounds good, the practice will be devastating to many Americans.
If we want to insure everybody, that’s one thing. Maybe we want that. Put it to the voters to increase our taxes another few thousand dollars per year, because that’s what it will cost. If we want it, we’ll vote for it and pay for it. But trying to lull us all into thinking that a “one-payer” system will “save” us money is flat-out criminal. This is a lie and it should be exposed.
This isn't cruel-hearted. It's the plain truth. I do believe that a civilized society needs to provide care for all of its citizens and I am willing to help pay for it. But I don't want my government and trial lawyers in charge of it.
The other GM strategy is to force the non-union auto makers to unionize. This would push competitors’ costs up by at least $1,000 per car (in addition to the projected $1,300 per car that the new CAFÉ standards will cost), with escalating costs after that. This would make U.S. car makers competitive again. Unfortunately, we will all have to pay the cost.
There are bills making their way through Congress that will make it virtually impossible to avoid the unionization of auto makers in the south. We hear nothing about this in the media, but we should be.
The Obama GM solution is for us all to have nationalized health care and unionized workers for their competition. The end result is that we will all pay another $2,500 more per car. Is that what you want?
Where is the outrage here? When hundreds of thousands of people are losing jobs and cutting expenses to make ends meet, why should GM still pay $150,000 per year for a union worker without a college degree? Isn’t $100,000 enough?
I have no problem with union workers being paid a fair, competitive wage. But the unions need to understand that this is a global economy, and that what they do affects us all. They shouldn't ask us to pay for their excess wages and benefits. At some point, the normal American citizen is going to get fed up with the selfishness and pig-headedness by union bosses. Americans will finally see that there has been a $100 Billion payoff (by the government) to unions and say “enough.”
That day can’t come soon enough.
GM’s union workers still receive close to $50,000 per year in higher pay (including benefits) than Honda, Toyota, Nissan & BMW, etc. workers in non-union states. I see nothing in the current negotiations that is going to significantly reduce that union labor cost below $150,000 per worker.
Anyone who buys a car, both new and used, must pay more because of this. We also need to pay more in taxes because of this. That’s where the bailout money comes from. And this $30 Billion will grow into $100 Billion (or more) before it is over.
What the government should do is to allow GM to hire non-union labor without the threat of a strike. This way, they will pay a fair wage, as determined by market forces, and they will once-again become competitive.
Each U.S. automaker must pay somewhere between $1,500 and $2,500 for each car in “legacy” and excess-labor costs, before the car even hits the assembly line. No wonder the U.S. makers can’t compete. If they were the only producers, they could pass the cost along and no one would be the wiser. Unfortunately for them, they must compete with other car makers, who don’t have these costs. When a car retails for $18,000 there is no profit margin when you add $2,500 to your costs.
The hidden plan is to bring about government health insurance. If the taxpayer picks up the insurance cost, the auto makers can reduce their legacy costs by about $1,000 per car.
While nationalized health care is being put forward as a “cost cutting” measure, it will do no such thing. Nothing done by the government is done at a lesser cost than the competitive, private sector.
While the rhetoric for nationalized medicine sounds good, the practice will be devastating to many Americans.
If we want to insure everybody, that’s one thing. Maybe we want that. Put it to the voters to increase our taxes another few thousand dollars per year, because that’s what it will cost. If we want it, we’ll vote for it and pay for it. But trying to lull us all into thinking that a “one-payer” system will “save” us money is flat-out criminal. This is a lie and it should be exposed.
This isn't cruel-hearted. It's the plain truth. I do believe that a civilized society needs to provide care for all of its citizens and I am willing to help pay for it. But I don't want my government and trial lawyers in charge of it.
The other GM strategy is to force the non-union auto makers to unionize. This would push competitors’ costs up by at least $1,000 per car (in addition to the projected $1,300 per car that the new CAFÉ standards will cost), with escalating costs after that. This would make U.S. car makers competitive again. Unfortunately, we will all have to pay the cost.
There are bills making their way through Congress that will make it virtually impossible to avoid the unionization of auto makers in the south. We hear nothing about this in the media, but we should be.
The Obama GM solution is for us all to have nationalized health care and unionized workers for their competition. The end result is that we will all pay another $2,500 more per car. Is that what you want?
Where is the outrage here? When hundreds of thousands of people are losing jobs and cutting expenses to make ends meet, why should GM still pay $150,000 per year for a union worker without a college degree? Isn’t $100,000 enough?
I have no problem with union workers being paid a fair, competitive wage. But the unions need to understand that this is a global economy, and that what they do affects us all. They shouldn't ask us to pay for their excess wages and benefits. At some point, the normal American citizen is going to get fed up with the selfishness and pig-headedness by union bosses. Americans will finally see that there has been a $100 Billion payoff (by the government) to unions and say “enough.”
That day can’t come soon enough.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
