A threat to the US economy "made in China"

The following paragraph sets the tone for what I want to say about Mitt later on, so bear with me!

As a student of finance, I am always intrigued with how candidates deal with economic issues. Currently, China is posing a huge threat to America's title of world economic powerhouse that they have enjoyed for the last 50+ years. China pegs its currency against the greenback instead of letting it float like most currencies do, and it does this primarily by purchasing and selling huge volumes of US government bonds and currency. Because their currency fluctuates proportionate to the green-back they can offer attractive labour cost and prices to American retailers, resulting in many manufacturing jobs being out-sourced so that Wal-mart can sell things cheaper (but hey, I can buy a TV for like 8 bucks!). American (and Canadian) companies that resist out-sourcing simply aren't able to land big contracts with retail giants (like Wal-Mart) and subsequently lose market share and eventually fizzle out of existence. Add the fact that China holds hundreds of billions of dollars (I've heard even over a trillion) of US bonds and currency, enough to significantly toy with the US economy, and there is a serious problem brewing. Increasingly more US ownership of companies, other equity, and bonds is slipping away from the hands of Americans and into the hand of foreigners (especially China). This, culminated with the fact that hundreds of millions of Chinese are moving into cities, causing an unparalleled surge of industrialization/growth in China, requiring a myriad of resources which are already scare. Currently the US is the largest consumer of oil, energy and other natural resources, but soon China will be hungrier and prices for these commodities will rise sharply causing major inflationary pressure on the US economy. Top this off with the fact that the savings rate in the US (and Canada) is atrocious, and dropping significantly year over year, lessening North Americans' traditional resilience to recessions due to savings put in store for a rainy day.

This is a real issue that will affect all Americans over the next decade and even further into the future. This is one of the biggest reasons that Mitt not only should, but NEEDS to, be president. There is no other candidate that can tackle this issue even half as good as Mitt. Why???

Because:

1) Mitt took Massachusetts out of debt and even helped them develop a handsome surplus. The US' government debt is growing at an alarming rate and so is its trade deficit (the US is importing more foreign products than its exports American products to others). I know that Mitt can do for America what he did for Massachusetts.

2) Mitt saved the scandal and debt laden Salt Lake Olympics and turned them around completely to make them a success. He has proven his success at handling crises under extreme amounts of pressure. Just look at a picture of any president before he was elected and one after his service and it is obvious that he has handled insane amounts of pressure. Mitt has shown that he can not only cope, but thrive under pressure. He has an amazing ability to turn any situation around, especially economically.

3) Mitt has turned many failing companies around and must have gained unique insight and experience from each one, making him better able to deal with various economic problems than any other candidate running, republican or democrat.

4) Mitt developed a state wide health insurance plan in Massachusetts (he actually DID this, unlike Hilary Clinton who just TALKS about it), helped to stop an outflow of jobs from the state and actually brought in 60,000 new ones (remember the China scenario - US jobs leaking away), and this 180 degree turn was done without raising taxes or incurring more debt (just think about how amazing that is).

5) Mitt has the idea to get rid of tax on capital gains, dividends and interest under $200,000. I cannot think of ANY way to encourage the average (not extremely wealthy) American to save money more than this. Furthermore increased savings will have a two-fold effect. First, it will prepare Americans for tough times of recession (through money put away for security) and prevent the economy from spiraling down more than it needs too. Secondly, when Americans invest, they take control of US equity and debt instead of countries like China. Who better to own American than Americans?

This man is EXACTLY what America needs, not someone who SAYS they'll do it, but someone who has actually DONE it. He has seen the problems that plague America on a smaller scale and it thus able to deal with them on a larger one. However, the only downside I can see to Mitt Romney is that he doesn't have Chuck Norris to manage the government's fiscal policy through fatal roundhouse kicks to the budget (this brilliant idea was already taken by Mike Huckabee.....no really that's actually his plan).








US debt - It's scary to look at, but there is nobody that can hack away at it better than Mitt.

Read more!

finally, a fair look

I think one of the most entertaining things about any campaign is the spin o' the media, which has been particularly fantastic with the way the media handles just about everything coming out of Mitt. I mean, never have I seen anyone's comments hacked at as mercilessly as Mitt's have been, if he says "lets cut taxes" the media spins that into "mormons are racist jew haters", Mitt says "I think little league baseball is important for kids" and the media reports that "Gov Romney is a baby killer" I think all can agree it has gotten a bit outta control, especially with the mormon topic. As such, it was with a great deal of apprehension that I read the recent follow up to Romney's speech in the Wall Street Journal and was pleasantly surprised to have a journalist argue for fairness. Whoda thought such a thing was possible, an American journalist arguing against bias. Give it a read, tell us what you think -

Linky to the article

Read more!

John McCain thinks highly of Mitt

Interestingly, I stumbled across this video today that shows John McCain talking about Mitt Romney. Obviously he thinks very highly of him!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QA7JTDjG-Po&eurl=http://nutmeggersformitt.blogspot.com/2007/11/john-mccains-mother-on-mitt-romney-hes.html

Read more!

Huckabee? No Seriously!

I guess I just don’t get the whole Mike Huckabee thing. He keeps moving up in some polls and now Iowa has him leading by 22 points over Romney according to a just released poll by Newsweek. WHY? What is his big appeal? He raised taxes to the tune of 500 million dollars and I hate that tune. His catch and release program for Arkansas's criminals would be laughable were it not so sad. When asked to explain his surge in the recent polls he says it is by the grace of God. You mean your record, your platform your values had nothing to do with it. You bet they didn’t (except for the values, I’ll give him that). Then, when asked by Don Imus the other morning about his lack of foreign policy credentials, Mike Huckabee joked: “And the ultimate thing is, you know, I may not be the expert as some people on foreign policy – but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.” (WABC Radio, 12/04/07) Add to this the fact he expects every Evangelical to vote for him for no other reason than he is also an Evangelical. I don’t get the dodge the questions, forget my record but, vote for me game plan. But, it seems to be working? Remember good people of Iowa, is this the most competent person to lead the nation as Commander and Chief for the next 4 year stint during arguably the most challenging times in recent memory. Mike you can run but you cannot hide (your skeletons in the closet, your lack of policy, your record on taxes, immigration, violent criminals…).

I may be wrong with my assessment of Mike Huckabee but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

Ken.

Read more!

Maybe Huckabee should consider a career in comedy instead of politics!

This guy is a walking joke! He is making a complete fool of himself, as well as a mockery of issues that are important to Americans. The guy must think that this election is to become student body president of an elementary school that only bases their votes on popularity and clever little slogans. Check out his latest add portraying his revolutionary new idea on how to keep the border safe.

That's right, Chuck Norris is the answer! What an absolute tool! Watch him next week when he does an add wearing a T-shirt that says "Vote for Pedro", and possibly even graces us with a Napoleon Dynamite-esque dance routine at the next major debate. After his little joke he didn't even explain what his actual plan to secure the border was, he just left it in the hands of Chuck Norris. I can't even begin to fathom why anyone would vote for this guy. I think I need an Advil. He has no real appeal to any logical, sane and honest person (but, hey he's not Mormon so he must be good right?). The sad thing is that America has real issues that need to be dealt with and people are actually considering voting for a guy who obviously takes them lightly. Here is a good joke that Mike Huckabee could use to get mathematicians on his side (it took me as long to think of as it did to form his campaign platform).

Huck + Chuck = Sucks (Clever I know, but about as funny as Mike Huckabee's sad attempt at winning an election through high school popularity contest tactics). I only think it's fair that if Mitt Romney has to address his religion that Mike Huckabee should address his lack of tact and stupidity. If Huckabee wins, I'm moving to Mongolia!

By the way, here is Romney's rebuttal to this ad:

Read more!

Will Evangelicals play checkers or chess?

I remember about half a year ago when I was forced to watch American Idol with my wife (who loves it), I noticed something interesting. Towards the end of the show, when only a few contestants remained, there were three African-American women who all had absolutely powerful and captivating voices, and in my opinion, were miles ahead of the bulk of the other singers in terms of raw talent. Despite their superiority in singing ability (again, in my opinion), all three of them were voted off the show in almost sequential order. I was flabbergasted by this trend that, to me, seemed unfair considering their ability and style that was a cut above the rest. The more I thought about it, the more I realized what had happened. Even though they were clearly talented, they all possessed a similar style, and therefore the viewers that enjoyed that particular style and type of voice were forced to choose which of the three to vote for. Obviously when the vote of a segment of the population is split three ways, it looses out to a segment that votes for a style and voice that is represented by only one singer. It makes me wonder if the winner of the show would have been different if those who voted for the three women previously mentioned had voted unanimously. This would have obviously taken a lot of organization and collaboration, but it would have produced a powerful influence and outcome. Logically, these voters would have had to decide which of the three women would be best to vote for. In doing so, I think that the most sensible criteria upon which they would base their decision would be to ask the question “which of these women will pull the most amount of votes from the rest of the population?” Evidently, this criteria would maximize the potential that their singer would win the whole competition.

So what the heck does this have to do with Mitt Romney?! As I see the pre-polls in Iowa, I am shocked that Mike Huckabee has surpassed Mitt Romney in popularity, and I think back to American Idol. To me, this sudden rise is popularity is due to the shift in votes from Evangelical Christians, which have significant representation in Iowa. This assumption is based on the fact that Huckabee is playing the “if you’re Evangelical, you should vote for an Evangelical” card, instead of encouraging voters to elect the best person based on pure merit. Apparently this strategy is working, but Evangelicals are making a huge mistake. In light of these recent happenings, the remainder of my post is especially meant for Evangelical voters.

This election must become a game of chess for Republican voters, not a game of checkers. In checkers, you try to jump over your opponent’s pieces as they become vulnerable. The game is basic and involves little strategy (some may argue with me!). However, in chess, the amount of strategy used in high-level games is mind-boggling. They say that a world-class chess player will think 17 moves ahead. Likewise a smart voter must think many moves ahead before making a rash, checkers-like, decision. The object of the game of chess is to put your opponent in “checkmate”. To Evangelicals, “checkmate” in the election is putting a President into office who will represent them, their morals, their views, etc. Some of the issues that deeply concern them are abortion, gay marriage and preserving family values (just to name a few). Just like the three similar sounding African-American women in American Idol, there are a few candidates that represent the moral opinions of Evangelicals running for the Republican nomination. Currently, the foremost of these candidates is Mike Huckabee, a former Evangelical minister, who is getting many votes because of the fact that he is Evangelical, just as Mitt Romney is losing votes because he isn’t. The irony of Evangelicals voting for Huckabee is that in doing so they are indirectly voting for Giuliani. This is like taking the opposite side’s queen in chess and thinking you have won the game, but what you have actually done in the bigger picture is given the opponent an easy opportunity to put you in checkmate (in this case being represented by nominee/president who does not stand up for any of the morality issues that you deeply value). Let us examine two “chess moves” that Evangelicals can make when they vote in Iowa (and later in other states) and then look ahead at the ensuing impact these moves will have on the big picture.

1) Move # 1- Voting for Mike Huckabee.

Admittedly, he would probably take Iowa and therefore get increased media attention that will help him in other states and allow voters to get to know him better.

His victory in Iowa and the resultant media attention will be deflated when Mitt Romney takes the second primary in New Hampshire, but he still may take North Carolina.

He will do well in states where Evangelicals form large portions of the population.

However, since Republicans vote on many issues besides morality and which religion someone belongs to, such as economic and social, for example, Huckabee will lose in many other states (including some of the bigger ones), where people don’t necessarily care if he was a Evangelical minister or not. Since he lacks a broad appeal and the experience to be an effective president, he will lose out to Giuliani, who doesn’t side with the Evangelicals on morality issues.

If by some miracle he wins the Republican nomination, he is too extreme to appeal to the masses in the presidential election and will almost certainly lose to the democrats.

2) Move # 2 – Voting for Mitt Romney

He will take Iowa and get a lot of much needed media attention. This will allow voters that don’t know how feasible a candidate he is to get to know him.

He will take New Hampshire and with the momentum from winning the first two states will have a great shot at taking South Carolina. With the momentum building, Republican voters will take a closer look at Romney, including Evangelicals, and see that he has what it takes to be president.

Admittedly it will be close between him and Giuliani, simply because of Giuliani’s overwhelming popularity as the mayor of NYC during 911. However, at this point Evangelicals, which have significant sway in the vote will realize that it boils down to someone who supports their views (Romney) and someone who does not (Giuliani) and this could give Romney the edge to win in the race for Republican nomination.

If Mitt wins the Republican nomination, it will be a tight battle, most likely with either Clinton or Obama, to become president. However, since Mitt has experience serving as governor in the bluest of blue states, has an unprecedented business background, amazing speaking abilities culminated with a presidential demeanor, has huge amounts of money behind his campaign for advertising and PR, experience fixing tough situations (Olympics, Massachusetts debt, failing businesses), and performs well on television and in debates, he will have a very good shot at becoming the next president of the United States of America.

This will undoubtedly be one of the most important elections in US history. China is surpassing the US economically, there is a mortgage crisis among other threats to the economy, the war on terror still rages, and the family unit of society is breaking down rapidly. In my view there is no other candidate who can effectively tackle these issues besides Mitt Romney, and he has the track record to back up this claim. However, without Evangelical support, it will be a lose-lose situation for him and them. He will lose to Giuliani and the Evangelicals will shoot themselves in the foot by electing a man who will not represent them well. To anyone who reads this, especially Evangelicals, remember that it is not about putting your opponent in “check”, it’s about putting him in “checkmate”.

Read more!

It Appears Mitt Will Give "The Mormon Speech"

Michael Luo of the New York Times reports that it appears that Mitt Romney will give "The Mormon Speech" that is to be titled "Faith in America". Luo notes that it is scheduled to be given this Thursday at the George H.W. Bush Library in College Station, Texas.

And this from the Romney camp.

“Governor Romney has made a decision to deliver a speech titled “Faith in America.”“The governor has been invited to The George Bush Presidential Library in College Station, Texas to deliver this address on Thursday, December 6.“This speech is an opportunity for Governor Romney to share his views on religious liberty, the grand tradition religious tolerance has played in the progress of our nation and how the governor’s own faith would inform his Presidency if he were elected.“Governor Romney understands that faith is an important issue to many Americans, and he personally feels this moment is the right moment for him to share his views with the nation.”“Governor Romney personally made the decision to deliver this speech sometime last week.“While identifying a venue for this address, the campaign consulted with President George H.W. Bush’s office last week about Governor Romney’s decision. President Bush was gracious enough to extend an invitation to deliver the speech at the presidential library.“The invitation to speak at the presidential library is not an endorsement of Governor Romney’s campaign.-Kevin Madden, Romney for President campaign spokesman

This should be interesting!

Ken.

Read more!