Ontario is the New Quebec

Canada prepared to offer auto giants $6-billion in financing

The governments of Canada and Ontario are in advanced negotiations to provide unprecedented bankruptcy financing for the Canadian operations of General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC.

According to people familiar with the matter, federal and provincial officials are in the final stages of discussions with the U.S. Treasury and senior auto executives toward a contribution of as much as $6-billion (U.S.) for unique cross-border financing that would see GM and Chrysler through the initial phases of creditor protection.

This vote buying boondoggle disgusts me. We're paying a bankrupt, foreign companies billions to keep producing crappy cars in Ontario, built by financially unsupportable, unskilled labour. Talk about pissing money down the drain. Throwing good money, after bad. Pardon me, while I take a few aspirin and lie down.

Ontario is the new Quebec.

Peter Schiff's Grim Evaluation of the Stimulus Bill

Peter Schiff at Euro Pacific Capital makes me want to add a shot or two of vodka to my orange juice this morning. Read and weep.

Despite the Presidential rhetoric of change, the Pelosi plan is Washington at its most habitual. Her version is a massive, pork-laden monster. Tilted heavily towards consumption, only 10 percent of the bill is allocated toward the infrastructure spending that the President talked about so frequently during the campaign. President Obama initially favored a middle-way. It was to be based on massive public spending, but specifically on infrastructure.

Far from restoring the economy to health, the 'pork-barrel' Pelosi plan will likely force the U.S. economy into the catastrophe of acute stagflation and decline, with grave long-term repercussions at home and abroad.

It is clear that we are now headed into an abnormally severe recession, and we may be face-to-face with Second Great Depression. Tell-tale symptoms of Depression include competitive currency devaluations and protective trade measures. Of even greater concern is the historic fact that trade wars too often lead to hot wars. The times of peace and unprecedented prosperity that we have
enjoyed for decades are now under threat.

(...)

The Washington regime, particularly members of the Democrat persuasion, leans towards a socialist solution of avoiding recession at any cost. After all, the bills are paid by others, such as taxpayers and holders of U.S. dollars. This results in an increasing amount of other peoples' money being spent on 'public' works that would in other times carry the label 'pork barrel.'

Read the whole thing. Schiff has credibility. He was the one who predicticted the 2008 melt-down. If only there was more debate. Obama paased it too quickly, and used the rhetoric of fear: "We can't wait, we need this now to avert catastrophe."

Ugh.

The New Era of Irresponsibility

Jacob Sullum in Reason magazine points out the paradox of wanting the American public to continue to spend recklessly:

Remember when the problem with Americans was that we saved too little, preferring instant gratification even when we couldn't afford it? As Obama put it in October, "we were allowed and even encouraged to spend without limits, to borrow instead of save."

Economists worried that our low saving rate made our economy and our government dangerously dependent on the whims of foreign investors. Yet on Monday, when Commerce Department data showed that the U.S. saving rate had risen sharply, from less than 1 percent of after-tax income a year ago to 3.6 percent in December, the press treated the increase as bad news.

"Putting away money and paying down debt may be good for one family's kitchen-table economics," The New York Times reported, "but the broader economy suffers in the short term when millions of families do it." The Associated Press agreed: "What's good for individuals—spending less, saving more—is bad for the economy when everyone does it."

This is comical. The best they can come up with is shop more, don't worry about debt. The whole problem in the first place. Do you get the feeling that the administration really don't know what they're doing?

Bush Apologists Suddenly Outraged By Big Spending and Debt

Mark Steyn, writing for the National Review gets blue in the face angry about Obama's out of control "stimulus" spending. Fair enough. I think it's huge mistake as well. Steyn had been a Bush apologist since 2000, so I didn't expect him to criticize Bush's ridiculous bailout spending. But oh boy, this Obama spending package will never do!

So now no politician demanding immediate government action wants to come off like Doctor Evil and invite instant derision by urging some nickel ’n’ dime billion-dollar boondoggle. In the bright new dawn, “ONE! TRILLION!! DOLLARS!!!” is the kind of price tag that commands respect. Congress is planning, at the time of writing, to double domestic discretionary spending. At the time of reading, I’m confident they’ll have quadrupled it. The Khmer Rouge proclaimed Year Zero; for the incoming Obama administration it’s the Year of Twelve Zeroes.

No, 2008 was the Year of Twelve Zeroes. There was a precedent. This is a detailed article about boondoggle including this line: "that the tab for the bailout by November 24 was already $4.6165 trillion." I tallied the score of how many times he mentions Obama, and Bush. The score for this lengthy screed?

Mentions of Obama: 7
Mentions of Bush: 0

Hell even John Kerry got one mention. It's like this was invented by Democrats a month ago. Obama has been in office for fourteen days.

These partisan pundits are too late for this outrage. Six months ago Peter Schiff had the one liner: "Trillions are the new billions." It's old news.

I don't agree with what Obama is doing, but most of the damage was done by Bush already. At the time Steyn was writing about how the "surge" was working in Iraq or that Sarah Palin was a great pick for VP.

Mike Ramirez Cartoon from the New York Post

(click to enlarge)