-
Recent Posts
- Kamala’s brother-in-law fleeced taxpayers for billions to give to left-wing groups and lawyers | New York Post | 8.24. 24
- Coming: Global Political Recalibration
- Clark Judge: FDR, Reagan, and European Nationalism | NatCon Rome 2020
- Lady Gaga Tells All
- Trial Lawyers Use COVID-19 to Prey on America’s Corporations | Real Clear Policy | 12.1.20
Categories
- Book Reviews (12)
- Communication Strategy (23)
- Constitution and Law (14)
- Economic Policy: General (33)
- Economic Policy: Health Care (30)
- Economic Policy: The Great Financial Crisis (15)
- Economic Policy: US Debt Crisis (32)
- Education Policy (1)
- Global Issues (57)
- Political Commentary: Campaign 2008 (18)
- Political Commentary: Campaign 2012 (43)
- Political Commentary: Campaign 2020 (5)
- Political Commentary: General (122)
- Politics & Policy (6)
- Ronald Reagan and the Reagan Administration (11)
- Speeches/Lectures (9)
- Uncategorized (6)
Archives
- September 2024
- March 2023
- July 2022
- April 2022
- December 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- November 2019
- December 2018
- September 2017
- April 2017
- January 2017
- October 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- June 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- January 2008
- June 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- June 2006
- October 2005
- August 2005
- March 2005
- November 2004
- August 2004
- June 2004
- December 2003
- October 2003
- August 2003
- April 2003
- July 2002
- December 2001
- November 2001
- May 2001
- December 2000
- June 2000
- January 1995
- August 1994
- August 1992
- June 1991
- July 1990
- September 1989
- July 1989
- March 1989
Tags
2012 2012 election Benghazi campaign constitution debt debt crisis Democrats economy election 2012 Energy Financial Times fiscal cliff foreign policy Gingrich Global Warming GOP Hoover Digest hughhewitt HughHewitt.com Immigration IRS National Review New York Post New York Times Obama Obamacare Republicans Ricochet Ricochet.com Romney Russia Scandal Senate SOTU speech Supreme Court Syria Tea Party Trump U.S. News Ukraine Wall Street Journal war Washington Times
The Case for More Sequester | USNews.com | 4.08.13
I’m guessing you missed the latest troubling economic news.
I am not talking about last week’s unemployment figures. A record 90 million Americans are now out of the workforce, taking the U.S. labor participation rate back to Carter administration levels – 63.5 percent.
The White House tried to blame The Sequester. But the job trend is years old now. Since the end of World War II, we have not had a longer period between the day that the number of U.S. jobs started to drop and the day the total number got back to the pre-recession starting line.
President Obama came to office wanting to reverse the Reagan Era. You remember the Reagan Era. It had the longest period of peacetime economic growth in American history (1983-2001). Well, Obama’s sure reversed that. Today the economy is in Carter-style doldrums, with barely a hint of real growth and worries everywhere that the Fed’s money-printing binge will catch up with us and reignite the stagflation of the late ’70s.
Even the global security conditions look like Carter redux. The Russians are acting more and more like the Soviets. Reports circulated Friday that they have practiced taking out missile defense facilities that protect South Korea, Japan and us against North Korea. “We should understand that they look at ‘reset’ differently than we do,” a retired senior Air Force general was quoted in the Washington Free Beacon. “They look at it as regaining their previous USSR position as a superpower while this administration is moving towards unilateral disarmament.”
But, no, the economic news I’m thinking of is more serious than today’s or tomorrow’s job numbers, for it points to a truly new and much more dangerous world order.
For seven decades, the anchor of American power has been the strength of the dollar, roughly 160 years (as of 1945) of careful financial management by the U.S. government. Yes, since World War II’s end, we have had an enormously capable military. Yes, our weapons – particularly since the Reagan build-up of the 1980s – have been the world’s most sophisticated. But even so, the power of the dollar, the global reserve currency and the medium of exchange in virtually all global trade gave options for projecting our power, financing our government and managing our global position that no other nation could come close to matching.
This isn’t an abstract thing. Remember that the final victory in the Cold War came about as a result of an economic strategy to which our military strategy was a contributor, not the other way around. The strategy’s elements were simple: 1) the enormous U.S. economic growth of the Reagan years, 2) the crushing costs to the Soviets of matching our arms buildup, 3) the prospect of seeing a generation of Soviet investment in first strike nuclear capacity made worthless by U.S. missile defense and 4) the ratcheting down of lending and advanced technology transfers from West to East.
The strong dollar was at the center of this unprecedented and unprecedentedly successful global strategy.
But in the past week reports have surfaced in Asia that China and Australia are concluding a deal to bypass the U.S. dollar in their bilateral trade. In other words, in one of the world’s more critical trade relationships, the role of the dollar as the currency of exchange – the reserve currency – is about to end.
For the last three years, we’ve heard rumblings out of Asia about China’s eroding trust in the reliability of our currency as a holder of value. Australia has an unusually close trade relationship with China. About a third of its exports go there. Thirty-five nations send 15 percent or more of their exports to China. Those nations could go the way of Australia next.
Consider this: For several years now, the U.S. government has had to borrow roughly forty cents of every dollar spent, with the Fed as the primary lender, basically printing money to pay the government’s bills. No wonder countries as much as private investors have begun to wonder if the dollar is worthy of their trust. Today, some of those countries are crawling away from the dollar. But tomorrow the crawl could become a walk and later a stampede.
What then? Federal Reserve Chairman Benjamin Bernanke has said that he can’t stop the massive money creation policies of the last few years until the government gets a hold on its spending and deficits.
Signs are accumulating that we need more sequestering, not less – and we need it soon.