Election Prediction

[Len Colby]

Is there any third choice in the US? Could a third party ever gain power?

Given the winner take all electoral system without runoffs that it very unlikely. There are very few examples of 3rd party candidates getting elected to anything and usually due to special circumstances.

John Lindsay lost the GOP primary in 1970 but was reelected mayor of NYC as a Liberal. He had been elected as a Republican in 1966.

NYC Mayor Bloomberg was reelected as an independent in 2009 but the Republicans did not run a candidate. He was elected as a Republican in 2001 and 2005

Incumbent Sen. Joe Liberman was re-elected as an "independent" after he lost the Democratic primary in 2006, we might see something similar happed in the still undecided Alaska senate race.

Many of the people who voted for Jesse Ventura did so as a protest assuming he didn't have a chance.

Bernie Sanders was elected to the Senate as a Socialist but was backed by the Democrats who did not run a candidate. Sanders had elected Mayor of Burlington and to the House as an independent and his successors as mayor were Progressives.

There are very few examples of independents or 3rd party candidates, who were not incumbents previously elected by major parties, wining elections when both major parties ran candidates.

One of the problems is that the voters dissatisfied with the two party system would not be able to agree on who to elect. Some are to the left of the Democrats, others are to the right of the Republicans, others are centrists and others are Libertarians or otherwise can't be defined on the left - right spectrum.

[Terry Priest]

john

everybody knows here that most of our goods are coming from overseas, even american flags are made in china. so we have dollars leaving the country to pay for goods, then the dollars come back when they loan money for bonds.

wikipedia says the current 2009 spending is 3.5 trillion, and revenues are 2.1 trillion.

our current longterm debt i think is around 13 trillion.

how that all washes out, i dont know. if an individual was spending 1.5 times more than he made, and his total debt was 6 times his annual income, he would be in some trouble. but printing money wouldnt be an option for him.

[Guest Tom Scully]

john,

the tea party doesn't have an economic policy. they ran on the phrase, "out of control spending." but they never make a simple declarative statement of how much spending has increased. local letters to the editor always talked about the deficit, sometimes getting the debt and deficit mixed up, never quantifying the drop in tax revenues because of the recession, or the component in the stimulus that was a tax cut, which conservatives say they always approve. these are dark times!

there is populist anger, jobs seem to be on a long downward trend. the conditions for a popular protest are there. the democrats do not seem to be a different party than the republicans when it comes to financial regulation, war-making, or the mechanics of government. these are the real problems, and the democrats seem to want to pick off relatively minor issues. so in my view, you have a party in power which deserves to be thrown out. however the anger is out of proportion to their actual misdeeds. and i think that should be placed squarely on the right wing gasbags, limbaugh, beck, drudge, and a whole army of others. the propaganda that is going on unchecked is vicious and immoral. its a political assassination of a different kind.

I was reading yesterday that China is the main holder of American bonds. What impact is this having on the economic policies of the US?

John, I do not suspect it matters much how much U.S. government debt the Chinese government holds, at least in the near future. Compare the leverage on U.S foreign policy that the influence of the high dollar amount of this Chinese government "investment" actually brings to Chinese officials, to the fealty exhibited by American federal office holders and major media towards the priorities of the government of Israel and its likud party leaders and their agenda, and whatever growth of Chinese leverage is not noticeable.

There was a joke distributed by the media recently on the occasion of the opening of a new Apple store in Beijing. The crux of it was that the youthful Chinese workers who actually manufacture the iPhone would be able to buy it at the new store.

Over the past 25 years, the "barge" that GE's Jack Welch descrined two decades ago as being outfitted as a production plant, traveling from port to

port of the lowest cost city and country of labor and least stringent labor and environmental laws and oversight, would temporarily get to host the barge in its ports and "enjoy" the jobs opporunities offered.

American based production equipment, especially, was literally unbolted from the factory floors and packed for shipment by the workers who had recently been the operators or it. This equipment was shipped to Mexico for a time until the owners of it decided the $2.00 per hour wage paid to Mexican workers was unattractive compared to paying half the amount to more productive and more docile Asian workers.

Recently, Chinese electronic assembly planst have been moving their factories from coastal Chinese cities to more remote inland provinces in newly built cities designed as a plan to prevent remote, rural workers from seeking their fortunes in already dramatically overcrowded places like Beijing and Shanghai.

Unless there is rapid improvement in the wealth and expectations of the American consumer class which I doubt can happen, China will suffer the effects of declining or stagnant demand and the tendency of those seeking cheap labor to shift more attention to Vietnam and evetually even to North Korea.

China needs those who seek cheap abundant labor more than those who seek that labor. I think that government is ever mindful and distracted by

the pressure of seeking ways to provide better opportunities to its massive and dissatisfied rural majority of "have nots." The government has no legitmacy and must constantly justify its hold on power by whatever means necessary, with an alliance of a military that may have morphed into a giant industrial conglomerate with its own agenda.

The Chinese are locked into bonds yielding a historically low interest rate, for a relatively long term it the portfolio averages five plus years to maturity. Since I believe deflation is the most probable near term trend, it is a trend that is the friend of the U.S. government as it services its debt mountain and interest rates still trending downward.

U.S. outstanding credit had not trended down since WWII, and is now in its third year of a contracting trend. The largest former outlet for creation

of new money in the American fractional reserve banking scheme, was mortgage lending. There is no sign of a recovery coming from their.

Last year, the Federal Reserve issued its usual reports on who was buying U.S. treasury bonds, and more than $600 billion of bond purchases came from a category that the Fed describes as "various households". This is a euphemism, since it was an increase in purchasing from that source of

about ten times the previous year, for what the Fed is openly doint now, "buying" $600 billion in new issues of this bond debt with money coming into existance through what amounts as a ledger entry, just as loan debt used to be funded with ledger entries on the books of the lending, fractional reserve banks.

As Paul Krugman has recently written, the federal stimulus and increased borrowing has still not offset the contraction in the money supply caused by the shrinking outstanding debt base caused by the paying down of debt, loan balances disappearing through defaults, and by less new lending.

The lack of lending, while the "haves" all over the world grow even wealthier, causes the deflation the Fed is so intent on trying to offset by its relentless quantitative easing. Concentrated wealth seeking higher returns in the first half of this decade caused the move into mortgage backed securities, and now it looks like bubbles have formed in gold, silver, and in G7 stock markets.

I think the Chinese government will stay distracted by the possibility of internal unrest, and will do nothing much to pressure the U.S. until China gives up on the resurgence of the U.S. consumer to stimulate employment in China. I do not see a rise in the level of consumer demand of the populations of India and China to the extent that it will even their import export balances. I expect aging U.S., Japanese, and western European populations to influence stagnation of consumer spending.

I expect the Euro and the Yen to weaken more rapidly than the dollar and make the dollar look better, as happened six months ago. Japanese government debt is at least twice the per capita level in the U.S., all factors considered.

I think U.S. defense, imports, and monetary policy will continue on a bold and reckless course, and get away with it, for a lot longer into

the future than most could have expected, with little advancement in energy conservation or emission reduction, especially if we are early now

in a period of republican party resurgance.

My expectations are set up so I will be surprised if what should logically be the consequences of all that has come to seemingly wreck the dollar and American hegemony, actually results in diminishing it, or the dollar, much at all. The bottom 80 percent round the world will grow even poorer and the top one percent will siphon up what little wealth the majority still cling to it. The majority have voted for this to happen, or capitulated to it by failing to rise up against thugs like the rulers of the Chinese, the Mexicans, and the Russians.

Canada and Belize look like the best places in this neighborhood to consider relocating to.

[John Simkin]

John, I do not suspect it matters much how much U.S. government debt the Chinese government holds, at least in the near future. Compare the leverage on U.S foreign policy that the influence of the high dollar amount of this Chinese government "investment" actually brings to Chinese officials, to the fealty exhibited by American federal office holders and major media towards the priorities of the government of Israel and its likud party leaders and their agenda, and whatever growth of Chinese leverage is not noticeable.

There was a joke distributed by the media recently on the occasion of the opening of a new Apple store in Beijing. The crux of it was that the youthful Chinese workers who actually manufacture the iPhone would be able to buy it at the new store.

Over the past 25 years, the "barge" that GE's Jack Welch descrined two decades ago as being outfitted as a production plant, traveling from port to

port of the lowest cost city and country of labor and least stringent labor and environmental laws and oversight, would temporarily get to host the barge in its ports and "enjoy" the jobs opporunities offered.

American based production equipment, especially, was literally unbolted from the factory floors and packed for shipment by the workers who had recently been the operators or it. This equipment was shipped to Mexico for a time until the owners of it decided the $2.00 per hour wage paid to Mexican workers was unattractive compared to paying half the amount to more productive and more docile Asian workers.

Recently, Chinese electronic assembly planst have been moving their factories from coastal Chinese cities to more remote inland provinces in newly built cities designed as a plan to prevent remote, rural workers from seeking their fortunes in already dramatically overcrowded places like Beijing and Shanghai.

Unless there is rapid improvement in the wealth and expectations of the American consumer class which I doubt can happen, China will suffer the effects of declining or stagnant demand and the tendency of those seeking cheap labor to shift more attention to Vietnam and evetually even to North Korea.

China needs those who seek cheap abundant labor more than those who seek that labor. I think that government is ever mindful and distracted by

the pressure of seeking ways to provide better opportunities to its massive and dissatisfied rural majority of "have nots." The government has no legitmacy and must constantly justify its hold on power by whatever means necessary, with an alliance of a military that may have morphed into a giant industrial conglomerate with its own agenda.

The Chinese are locked into bonds yielding a historically low interest rate, for a relatively long term it the portfolio averages five plus years to maturity. Since I believe deflation is the most probable near term trend, it is a trend that is the friend of the U.S. government as it services its debt mountain and interest rates still trending downward.

U.S. outstanding credit had not trended down since WWII, and is now in its third year of a contracting trend. The largest former outlet for creation

of new money in the American fractional reserve banking scheme, was mortgage lending. There is no sign of a recovery coming from their.

Last year, the Federal Reserve issued its usual reports on who was buying U.S. treasury bonds, and more than $600 billion of bond purchases came from a category that the Fed describes as "various households". This is a euphemism, since it was an increase in purchasing from that source of

about ten times the previous year, for what the Fed is openly doint now, "buying" $600 billion in new issues of this bond debt with money coming into existance through what amounts as a ledger entry, just as loan debt used to be funded with ledger entries on the books of the lending, fractional reserve banks.

As Paul Krugman has recently written, the federal stimulus and increased borrowing has still not offset the contraction in the money supply caused by the shrinking outstanding debt base caused by the paying down of debt, loan balances disappearing through defaults, and by less new lending.

The lack of lending, while the "haves" all over the world grow even wealthier, causes the deflation the Fed is so intent on trying to offset by its relentless quantitative easing. Concentrated wealth seeking higher returns in the first half of this decade caused the move into mortgage backed securities, and now it looks like bubbles have formed in gold, silver, and in G7 stock markets.

I think the Chinese government will stay distracted by the possibility of internal unrest, and will do nothing much to pressure the U.S. until China gives up on the resurgence of the U.S. consumer to stimulate employment in China. I do not see a rise in the level of consumer demand of the populations of India and China to the extent that it will even their import export balances. I expect aging U.S., Japanese, and western European populations to influence stagnation of consumer spending.

I expect the Euro and the Yen to weaken more rapidly than the dollar and make the dollar look better, as happened six months ago. Japanese government debt is at least twice the per capita level in the U.S., all factors considered.

I think U.S. defense, imports, and monetary policy will continue on a bold and reckless course, and get away with it, for a lot longer into

the future than most could have expected, with little advancement in energy conservation or emission reduction, especially if we are early now

in a period of republican party resurgance.

My expectations are set up so I will be surprised if what should logically be the consequences of all that has come to seemingly wreck the dollar and American hegemony, actually results in diminishing it, or the dollar, much at all. The bottom 80 percent round the world will grow even poorer and the top one percent will siphon up what little wealth the majority still cling to it. The majority have voted for this to happen, or capitulated to it by failing to rise up against thugs like the rulers of the Chinese, the Mexicans, and the Russians.

Canada and Belize look like the best places in this neighborhood to consider relocating to.

Tom, what you describe is a more extreme form of what is happening in the UK.

What is interesting is that it is the so-called "communist" states that have the best record of keeping labour costs very low (that is because they control the trade unions). In fact, what you have in China is more like a fascist or state capitalist system.

I think the only answer to the problem is protectionism. It will create inflation but it will reduce unemployment in the advanced economies.

[Greg Burnham]

Tom, what you describe is a more extreme form of what is happening in the UK.

What is interesting is that it is the so-called "communist" states that have the best record of keeping labour costs very low (that is because they control the trade unions). In fact, what you have in China is more like a fascist or state capitalist system.

I think the only answer to the problem is protectionism. It will create inflation but it will reduce unemployment in the advanced economies.

I think you are very likely correct, John--regarding protectionism being the most effective, at least short term, fix to the high unemployment rates. Such a policy is highly unlikely, IMO, in the States--due to the political climate being advanced by the White House. If a Libertarian was elected president in 2012, it would perhaps be the FIRST item on the agenda.

[Len Colby]

Unless I misread you, you are confused "free trade" is one of the central planks of the Libertarians. And them winning the White House is even less likely than you admitting your error concerning Zapruder and LeGon at Nardis.

PS to John S. you should remove that misinfo from Spartacus.

[John Simkin]

This is why the UK needs to protect itself from Chinese imports. Here are the latest trade figures (September 2010)

Value of exports are followed by imports.

United States: £3,294m (£2,339m)

Germany: £2,269m (£3,822m)

France: £1,583m (£1,858m)

Netherlands: £1,571m (£2,192m)

Irish Republic: £1,442m (£936m)

Belgium: £1,119m (£1,567)

Spain: £874m (£762m)

China: £735m (£2,633m)

Italy: £686m (£1,072m)

No wonder the UK government is considering helping the Irish. The combined exports that we have with China, Russia, Brazil and India is less than what we export to Ireland.

I would be interested in seeing the trade figures for the United States. I had no idea that we had a trade surplus with the United States. No wonder some of you are in favour of protectionism.

[Terry Priest]

wrt to china, not britain, and state capitalism versus its effect on free trade capitalism. i was involved in a new factory built in minnesota. the steel was cheaper to fabricate and ship from china. steel is the same price the world over. the steel has to be cut, end plates welded on, holes, braces, etc. To prove it was all correct, it was erected in china, errors corrected, pictures sent, dismantled and shipped. This is obviously "not fair", there is no wages low enough to justify this.

so add the effect of the state capitalizing core industry, low wages, lack of regulation, environmental neglect, and central planning starts to look like it has transformed from inefficient communism into a triumph over idealistic capitalism.

jobs will follow low wages. in america, from the industrial northeast, to the midwest, to the south, and now to mexico and china. this seems to me the challenge of capitalism, no industrial country has ever had an expanding economy that also did not have low wages.