Since John Hussman has gone political his post is now under the guidance of the "Fair Use Doctrine!"

Hussman

Goes Political

Pillages

President

Trump

January 30, 2017

On Governance

John P. Hussman, Ph.D.

Those who aspire to “right speech” often measure their words with four questions: Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary? Is it the right time? Right speech should not escalate conflict, but it doesn’t retreat from necessary truth, and criticisms don’t always seem kind. The question of right speech is the question of how one might best serve others. Criticism with the intent to offend is not constructive, but silence is equally detrimental when it quietly endorses a pattern of offense, or encourages the silence of others.

DYI:  Further on in your post you make it very clear you are talking about President Trump there is no doubt the new Potus is very direct stripping away a bit of civility and political correctness.  This is not the time for a lecture on manners or civil discourse as President Trump fires back his response bypassing through social media the main stream press who have been caught flat out lying (but with wonderful civility) pumping out massive amounts of PROPAGANDA!

Those of you who have followed my work over the decades know that I look at the world holistically in terms of the interconnection and responsibility we have toward others, and I’ve never been much for separating “business” from those larger values. After all, most of my income regularly goes to charity, and nearly everything that remains follows our own investment discipline. Whether my comments on matters like peace, civility, economic policy or governance are well-received or not (and I'm grateful that they have been over the years), there are moments when one has the responsibility to speak if one has a voice.

DYI:  This blogger has followed your posts for over a decade and yes you have made pleas as if you were a Miss American contestant who only wants world peace!  Well golly gee John, so do I and along with everyone else.  Over this period of time have you mentioned in any detail President Obama’s [whatever his real name is?] escalation of war in the Middle East despite his Noble Peace Prize?  If you have I must have missed it despite reading your blog religiously.

Think I’m being one sided by only picking on Democrats.  Think again.  President Chaney - I mean President Bush and the 9-11-2001 attacks.  Any critical thinking American such as yourself when the second plane (there were NO planes!) was “absorbed” into the South Tower negating Sir Isaac Newton’s third law of motion.  Immediately an analytical and critical thinking American would be highly suspicious on that fateful day.  Yet I’ve never heard (video) nor read anything from you.     

Our country faces many legitimate political disagreements. There are segments of America that view government as too bureaucratic, see foreign trade as a source of job insecurity, value national security as a priority, believe that each country has the right to a national identity, and feel that even a nation of immigrants has limits on the pace at which it can assimilate new citizens. They feel that their interests have been subordinated to an elitist philosophy that presumes that regulation is always beneficial, and that government always knows best. We can engage honestly and in good faith about those concerns, even where we disagree. Political issues like that are best settled not by insulting each other, but by openly expressing and listening to the values and concerns of each, and constructing solutions where each side might concede or trade various lower priorities, so that both can achieve their higher ones.

DYI:  Again your major concern is to have Donald learn a bit of manners.  Yet during the Obama’s administration we’ve had a bevy of fake shootings as exampled by Sandy Hook only to TERRORIZE the American public into accepting further gun control laws all based upon DECIET!  Manners trumps (sorry about the pun) deceit?

 

Or going back into history during the Nixon administration that authorized the fabricated moon landings all for positive propaganda in an attempt to bolster his failing Presidency.  He wasn’t called Tricky Dick for nothing!  And your biggest concerns are manners as NASA and their contractors ripped off the tax payers for BILLIONS??

 (1.) There is no changing the outcome of what was already a dismal choice for many Americans, but we can insist on rejecting a model of uncivil behavior. It is unworthy of emulating for ourselves, much less for our children. To minimize detestable behavior is essentially to condone it. (2.)It is the refuge of cowards to defend obvious offenses by deconstructing them (“He wasn’t belittling a disabled person. See? He’s waving his hands while belittling this person too”),(3.)or to condone predatory behavior toward women by diffusing responsibility (“Yeah, but that other guy was also a predator”). Our intolerance for such a tireless pattern of offense shouldn’t depend on our race, or gender, or ability, or political views, even among those who view the man as a means to achieve political ends. 

DYI:  As Ronald Reagan once said in his debate with Jimmy Carter “Here we go again!”  In sales there is saying "sell the sizzle not the steak."  To ask anyone to simply stand there and not respond to known liars (the steak) and allow it to pass meekly (the sizzle) is beyond comprehension whether the individual is disabled or not.

As to the audio tape with his locker room conversation it was highly edited.  John you need to get with the newest of technologies where hearing and seeing is no longer believable.  What Trump was saying that since he became a billionaire celebrity woman would throw themselves at him.  This is part and parcel for celebrities – women or men including professional athletes.

With regard to international relations, the intentional provocation of both allies and trading partners is of deep concern. One might allow a generous interpretation that these provocations are intended to create new bargaining chips for use in trade negotiations (e.g. insulting Mexico, taunting China about Taiwan and the South China Sea). Yet even setting offenses aside, the associated protectionism is misguided economics, particularly at this point in the economic cycle. Given U.S. labor demographics, even a 4% unemployment rate in 2024 would bring average annual civilian employment growth to just 0.4% annually in the coming 8 years, while a 6% unemployment rate would place intervening job growth at just 0.2% annually. All other economic growth will rely on productivity growth (output per worker). The primary determinant on that front will be growth in U.S. gross domestic investment (GDI). Because of savings-investment dynamics, steep reductions in the trade deficit have always been associated with a collapse in U.S. GDI growth. Put simply, this new trade strategy courts recession or worse. That’s particularly true given a speculative financial bubble resulting from Federal Reserve’s misguided dogma that zero interest rates would bring prosperity without consequence. We now face the third financial collapse since 2000 (more data on that below).

DYI:  Despite all of the promises these trade deals have been a disaster for America’s common man.  Our industrial base has been gutted.  The latest trade proposal TPP would have made these mega corporations tax free entities AND their owner/managers exempt from prosecution.  Along with any country that places regulations on these corporations they can sue for lost profits.  Heads they win and tail’s you lose!  There is no moral basis for this treaty as it is nothing more than a con job all done in secret! 

 Meanwhile, we should recognize that foreign provocation has also been used around the world, and throughout history, as a strategy to expand domestic control. This often takes the form of “emergency powers.” Given the man’s clear aspiration to accrue and exercise authority, we shouldn’t naively ignore that potential. (1.) Recalling James Madison, “If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be under the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. The means of defense against a foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home.” (2.) We have a leader that talks of the benefits of foreign plunder and the virtues of torture, yet we don’t recognize the seeds of despotism? Oh, that’s right, because we’re talking about the “enemy.” 

DYI:  You are absolutely correct!  Where were you when Bush Jr. pulled off 9-11 so America could go galloping off to war AND the creation of the secret police called Home Land Security? And as previously mentioned Obama’s faked shootings to harbor additional gun control along with his ramping up of wars all across the Mideast; you are day late and dollar short!    Plus Obama and Hillary Clinton with all of their rhetoric attempting to gin up a new cold war with Russia; where were you?  Oh I know Obama/Clinton stated their convictions in a very civil manner in an attempt to fleece the American taxpayers out billions to fund the military industrial complex.

I’ve mentioned many times in my blog about my deep disagreement with Trump’s statement “to the victor go the spoils.”  Nations around the world will not respect us they will only fear us especially those with natural resources up to and including Russia.  It is an insane proposal that could easily lead to world war - that will arrive on our shores - with deaths approaching a billion worldwide as nuclear and directed energy weapons are deployed.    

A final concern relates to the separation of powers and the relationship between the express will of the People and the actions of the Executive. 

(1.) When the founders of this nation established the separation of powers in the U.S. Constitution, they were serious about it.  

(2.)Over time, through lack of vigilance, the public has allowed this separation to be undermined, to the point where people hardly recognize when violations occur.  

(3.) Here is a reminder. Article I Section I places all legislative powers with Congress. 

(4.) Article I Section 7 provides that all bills for raising revenue originate in the House of Representatives, which are then amended by the Senate. 

(5.) Article I Section 8 provides that only Congress has the power to declare war. Article I Section 9 provides that no money may be spent that is not pursuant to a law enacted by Congress.

DYI:  Bingo John – a direct hit – spot on!  I’ve been saying this for years glad to have you aboard to restoring the constitution.  At least toward the end of the post you leave us with a bit of hope; and regretfully despair as our nation loses its constitutional bearings.  It must be emphasized these abuses have all been enjoyed by both Democrats and Republicans.  Fraud, deceit, and constitutional abuse are now institutionalized.  The only way our country will end this tyranny is when the American public discovers our founding fathers checks and balances given to us in our most precious document the constitution!        

DYI