America Mortgaged at an Adjustable Rate. by Peter Schiff
The Federal
Reserve ran another "stress test" on major financial institutions
and has determined that 15 of the 19 tested are safe, even in the
most extreme circumstances: an unemployment rate of 13%, a 50% decline
in stock prices, and a further 21% decline in housing prices. The
problem is that the most important factor that will determine these
banks' long-term viability was purposefully overlooked – interest
rates.
In the wake
of the Credit Crunch, the Fed solved the problem of resetting adjustable-rate
mortgages by essentially putting the entire country on an teaser
rate. Just like those homeowners who really couldn't afford their
houses, our balance sheet looks fine unless you factor in higher
rates. The recent stress tests assume market interest rates stay
low, the federal funds rate remains near-zero, and 10-year Treasuries
keep below 2%. Why are those safe assumptions? Historic rates have
averaged around 6%, a level that would cause every major US bank
to fail!
Syria Gets Complicated
by Srdja Trifkovic
A three-member “Independent International Commission of Inquiry” appointed by the United Nations concluded on February 23 that “gross human rights violations” had been ordered by the Syrian authorities as state policy at “the highest levels of the armed forces and the government,” amounting to “crimes against humanity.” The 72-page document thus provides the potential basis for Bashar al-Assad’s indictment by the International Criminal Court (ICC).
The
panel presented the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights with a
sealed envelope containing the names of Syrian officials who should be
“investigated,” but those names remain secret. The U.N. did not specify
who these investigating authorities might be, but that we know: on June
27th—three months into NATO’s air war on the side of rebel forces—the ICC presented intervening powers with a veneer of legitimacy by issuing a warrant for Muammar Qaddafy’s arrest.
The latest U.N. report seems deliberately crafted to provide a future
ad-hoc “coalition” with an upfront justification for a military
intervention in Syria, also based on “the responsibility to protect”
doctrine which was invoked in the Libyan case. In view of the Russian
and Chinese veto, a regional coalition may cite this principle in order
to attack Syria without the U.N. Security Council mandate.The Evil Party Rides Again
by Tom Piatak
There are many reasons to criticize the the Republicans as the
Stupid Party, and I have often done so. But we need to remember that,
in Sam Francis' dichotomy, the other major party is the Evil Party. And
some of what the leader of the Evil Party is doing has no real
precedent in American history.
On January 11, 2012, the Supreme Court
ruled unanimously against the Obama Administration, which had argued
that the government had the right to sue the Lutheran Church—Missouri
Synod for violating anti-discrimination law in terminating one of its
ministers. At oral argument, the Obama Administration lawyer told the
justices that it should make no difference for purposes of
anti-discrimination law whether an employer is religious or secular.
Since the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits sex discrimination in
employment, the Obama Administration's argument was consistent with a
claim that churches that refuse to ordain women violate
anti-discrimination law.
Ron Paul’s Hour of Decision
by Justin Raimondo,
Is Ron Paul running for president in the wrong party?
The results of the GOP primaries, so far, would certainly seem to suggest that. Paul’s support draws heavily from two constituencies one doesn’t normally associate with the Republican party: young voters, who are overwhelmingly independents, and antiwar voters, who tend to be Democrats. He has carried the youth vote and garnered a significant proportion of independents in virtually every contest: more significantly, polls show him beating President Obama in the general election by winning a huge portion of the independent and youth votes. Combined with the anybody-but-Obama vote, Paul’s potential base of support in a two-way race defines the contours of a winning electoral coalition, one that could win him the White House, bring about a major political realignment – and upend the political Establishment in this country.
The problem, for Paul, is that the GOP leadership is implacably opposed to his candidacy: never mind all that nonsense about a Romney-Paul “alliance,” which was just an invention of the “mainstream” media pushed by the Santorum campaign. After all, the Romneyites stole the Maine caucuses right out from under the Paul campaign, and are doing their best to repeat the same fraud in the rest of the caucus states. Some “alliance”!
Three factors have kept Paul from being a real contender: not only the hostility
of the leadership and the age demographics of the average Republican primary
voter – which is well
over 40 – but also the ideological factor. After a
decade and
more of neoconservative domination, not only of the party but of the conservative
movement, the GOP is
the War Party. For the Paul campaign, this is fatal. Ron has made his
anti-interventionist views the linchpin of his campaign: he never
fails to bring up the issue of war and peace, even when discussing some
economic or social topic. That’s because he realizes – unlike some “libertarians”
– the issue is central to
the question of rolling back the power of government to rule our lives.A Few Words About Abortion. by Andrew P. Napolitano
Last week marked
the 39th anniversary of Roe vs. Wade, the U.S. Supreme Court decision
that permitted abortions. Prior to that case, abortion was regulated
by each state, and most of them prohibited it unless two physicians
could certify that the baby growing in the mother's womb would likely
result in the death of the mother. Even the states that permitted
abortions when the pregnancy was caused by rape or incest, an extremely
rare occurrence, did not permit it after the sixth month of pregnancy.
No hay comentarios.:
Publicar un comentario