The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Merkel's Boner vs. Nixon's Wage & Price Controls
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

In puzzling over Merkel’s Boner, I’m reminded of one of the wackier political events of my lifetime: President Nixon imposing a wage and price freeze on the country in 1971. It sounds ridiculous now, but it seemed like a good idea at the time. As I recall, pretty much everybody except Milton Friedman was for it. I was for it. (In my defense, I was 12.)

From The Commanding Heights by Daniel Yergin and Joseph Stanislaw, 1997:

The climax came on August 13-15, 1971, when Nixon and 15 advisors repaired to the presidential mountain retreat at Camp David. Out of this conclave came the New Economic Policy, which would temporarily — for a 90-day period — freeze wages and prices to check inflation. That would, it was thought, solve the inflation-employment dilemma, for such controls would allow the administration to pursue a more expansive fiscal policy — stimulating employment in time for the 1972 presidential election without stoking inflation. The gold window was to be closed. …

Most of the participants at the Camp David meeting were exhilarated by all the great decisions they had made. During their discussions, much attention was given to the presentation of the new policy, particularly to television. President Nixon expressed grave concern that if he gave his speech during prime time on Sunday, he would preempt the tremendously popular television series Bonanza, thus potentially alienating those addicted to the adventures of the Cartwright family on the Ponderosa ranch.

But his advisors convinced him that the speech had to be given before the markets opened on Monday morning, and that meant prime time. A few of the advisors would recollect that more time was spent discussing the timing of the speech than how the economic program would work. Indeed, there was virtually no discussion of what would happen after the initial 90-day freeze or how the new system would be terminated.

Nixon’s chief of staff, H.R. Haldeman, went in to see the president privately at Camp David the evening before his speech. “The P. was down in his study with the lights off and the fire going in the fireplace, even though it was a hot night out,” Haldeman wrote in his diary. “He was in one of his sort of mystic moods.”

Haldeman’s phrase “mystic moods” doesn’t necessarily mean “drunk.”

Nixon told Haldeman “that this is where he made all his big cogitations…. He said what really matters here is the same thing as did with [Franklin] Roosevelt, we need to raise the spirit of the country; that will be the thrust of the rhetoric of the speech…. We’ve got to change the spirit, and then the economy could take off like hell.” As he worked on the speech, Nixon tormented himself, worrying whether the headlines would read NIXON ACTS BOLDLY or NIXON CHANGES MIND. “Having talked until recently about the evils of wage and price controls,” Nixon later wrote, “I knew I had opened myself to the charge that I had either betrayed my own principles or concealed my real intentions.” But Nixon was nothing if not a practical politician, as he made clear in his masterful explanation of his shift. “Philosophically, however, I was still against wage-price controls, even though I was convinced that the objective reality of the economic situation forced me to impose them.”

Nixon’s speech — despite the preemption of Bonanza — was a great hit. The public felt that the government was coming to its defense against the price gougers. The international speculators had been dealt a deadly blow. During the next evening’s newscasts, 90 percent of the coverage was devoted to Nixon’s new policy. The coverage was favorable. And the Dow Jones Industrial Average registered a 32.9-point gain — the largest one-day increase up to then.

The Cost of Living Council took up the job of running the controls. After the initial ninety days, the controls were gradually relaxed and the system seemed to be working. But unemployment was not declining, and the administration launched a more expansionary policy. Nixon won reelection in 1972. In the months that followed, inflation began to pick up again in response to a variety of forces — domestic wage-and-price pressures, a synchronized international economic boom, crop failures in the Soviet Union, and increases in the price of oil, even prior to the Arab oil embargo.

Nixon, under increasing political pressure from the investigations of the Watergate break-in, reluctantly reimposed a freeze in June 1973. Government officials were now in the business of setting prices and wages. This time, however, it was apparent that the control system was not working. Ranchers stopped shipping their cattle to the market, farmers drowned their chickens, and consumers emptied the shelves of supermarkets. Nixon took some comfort from a side benefit that George Shultz, at the time head of the Office of Management and Budget, identified. “At least,” Shultz told the president, “we have now convinced everyone else of the rightness of our original position that wage-price controls are not the answer.” Most of the system was finally abolished in April 1974, 17 months after Nixon’s triumphant reelection victory over George McGovern — and four months before Nixon resigned as president.

So it is possible for the political system to learn from politician’s mistakes. But humiliating loss of office helps get the message across.

 
• Tags: Merkel's Boner 
Hide 179 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. I understand less about the economy than ever before. The Fed is loaning money at zero %? Who is borrowing it? And why do they not borrow more and speculate with it? If import tariffs are bad why does the Chinese economy do so well? Why has the price of gold not continued to increase as the Peter Schiffs have predicted? Why no inflation despite federal deficit spending and central bank zero interest rates?

    • Replies: @yaqub the mad scientist
    Why has the price of gold not continued to increase as the Peter Schiffs have predicted?

    I've never seen gold really discussed on ISteve before now. I'd like to hear from this group their thoughts. Gold's a mystery to me, this thing that libertarians and Indians concern themselves with.

    , @The Anti-Gnostic
    Good questions. I have another one: why is gasoline cheaper--by over half--than it was eight years ago?

    Atlanta is BOOMING with construction. Labor force participation is declining. And I see more high-end luxury cars in a year than I remember seeing my entire life previous. Strange days.
    , @AnAnon
    I'll try to answer these:

    "Who is borrowing it?" - other banks and probably other countries.

    "And why do they not borrow more and speculate with it?" - the sub prime bubble was probably that. They've been caught with toxic assets enough to know there is no sympathy for them.

    "If import tariffs are bad why does the Chinese economy do so well?" - import tariffs must not be so bad.

    "Why has the price of gold not continued to increase as the Peter Schiffs have predicted?" - gold hit 1800 an ounce, but it fell because deflationary forces are catching up to the inflationary ones. the reality is that people do sell commodities if their value gets too high, as the Hunt brothers discovered with silver.

    "Why no inflation despite federal deficit spending and central bank zero interest rates?" - deflation on one hand, not counting "volatile" food and energy on the other. lastly our trade deficits are sucking hundreds of billions of dollars out of the country every year, and as near as can be determined the foreigners are content to sit on all of it. if the money ever came back to the US, you'd see quite a bit of inflation however.
    , @Citizen of a Silly Country
    I'm not claiming that this is "the" answer, but it may be part of why such a massive increase in the money supply by the fed hasn't resulted in inflation.

    The Money Multiplier

    Yes, the fed flooded the banking system with money (important note: dollars are a form of credit) but commercial banks haven't been lending that money out at a particularly quick rate. Basically, the banks are - and have been - hoarding the cash flooded into the system by the fed.

    When a dollar is introduced into the banking system, it is deposited at a bank, which then lends it out to someone. That someone spends the money on something, which results in another person getting that dollar. That person then either saves the dollar (thus putting it into a bank to be lent again) or spends it on something and thus passing it along to someone else. This is how money multiplies and grows - the Money Multiplier.

    The fed throwing money into the system creates the liquidity to get the process started. However, if the banks hoard most of the money (and consumers quickly save their money rather than spending it out of fear), the money isn't multiplying itself at the same rate as in the past. The Velocity of Money (the speed at which money is multiplied or moves through the system) goes way down.

    Think of the money supply as firewood. You can have all the wood that you want, but without a match (or in a slow economy a smoldering fire in a light rain), you won't get much or any fire. However, if you have a ton of wood on the fire, you certainly have the potential for a seriously big fire.

    The Money Multiplier for the M2 monetary base was around eight before the financial crisis. It dropped to four after 2009 and continues to trickle down; it's around three right now.

    There's a lot of money in the system, but it's not moving around much.

    Another way to look at the situation (possibly even another argument) is to understand that a dollar is just another form of credit. It's a loan. Look at a dollar bill. At the top, it says Federal Reserve Note. Now, think back to 2008-2009. Banks dramatically cut back lending and consumers dramatically cut back borrowing. In essence, the amount of credit in the system was collapsing. The fed jumped in and replaced that credit with dollars (another form of credit). Because the amount of money supply (credit) increase matched the amount of credit destroyed by banks and consumers, the system stayed in balance and thus there was no inflation.

    Danger Will Robinson

    So what's the danger? The danger is that the fed won't be able to reduce the money supply fast enough if the money multiplier starts to increase or short-term interest rates start rising.

    To a degree, it's a question of the the utility of goods vs the utility of money. It's seems pretty balanced at the moment, but that could change.

    Regardless, it seems to me that while probably necessary during and immediately after the financial crisis, the fed's continued flooding of the system with money over the past couple of years has unnecessarily put the country in danger of inflation. The fed should move quicker to reduce its massive balance sheet.

    But, again, this is all just guesswork. Could be right, could be wrong, probably a bit of both.
    , @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Btw, the huge increase in the money supply also helps explain some of the increase in the U.S. stock market. (Not all by any means. It's a very complex machine.)

    It's not that money flooded into the stock market. That's ridiculous. There's no such thing as money on the sidelines. However, by purchasing long-term bonds with QE, the fed drove down short- and, likely somewhat, long-term bond rates.

    To be in the stock market, investors generally demand a certain premium over bonds. Now, how much of a premium can change, but all things being equal, if you drive down interest rates on bonds, you drive down how much has to be earned by investors to be in the stock market. The way that you drive down long-term rates of return on an assets is to drive up its current price. That's what happened in the stock market: A one-time pop in value which will lead to lower returns in the future.

    The same thing happened with intermediate and long-term bonds.

    Now, that was great for people - like me - who own stocks and long-term bonds. However, what it means going forward is much lower annual returns for the next decade or so - for both U.S. stocks and bonds.

    My point is that everyone should be prepared for low returns in their portfolios for the seven to ten years. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.

    You likely could mitigate those lower returns by owning international stocks. Larry Swedroe just had a nice couple of articles at ETF.com about the expected low rates of return and what you can do to lessen the pain a bit - though, in the end, we're all in for lower returns.

    Don't trust some guru. Timing/beating the market is basically impossible. Just get as diversified as possible at the lowest cost possible.

    Good luck.
    , @Felix.

    I understand less about the economy than ever before. The Fed is loaning money at zero %? Who is borrowing it? And why do they not borrow more and speculate with it? If import tariffs are bad why does the Chinese economy do so well? Why has the price of gold not continued to increase as the Peter Schiffs have predicted? Why no inflation despite federal deficit spending and central bank zero interest rates?
     
    The two bolded statements are closely related.

    Who is "borrowing" the money that the Fed is giving away for free? The Fed's cousins on Wall Steet.

    Why is there no inflation? There is inflation. It's called the equities aka stock market. If you or me received free money from the Fed (lol!), we'd go to the supermarket or the BMW dealership and buy more stuff, driving up the price of consumer goods, aka fueling inflation. When the Fed's cousins on Wall Street get free money from Bernanke or Yellen, they plow it straight into assets, chiefly equities. This is why the market is at an all time high, despite the underlying economy being in the utter dumps, with a labor force participation rate the lowest it's been since the introduction of the statistic. But when you create trillions of new money, that money has to go somewhere, hence the stock bubble.

    So yeah, the answer is that there is inflation, it's just in the sorts of things that the Fed's cousins on Wall Street buy, not the kinds of things that you or me buy. That money the Fed printed never made its way down to wages where we would get a hold of it, it stayed with the usual suspects like Jamie Dimon and Lloyd Blankfein on Wall Street
  2. Steve,

    I remember the speech, too, although my memory is that it was in late afternoon (Central time): I was the only member of my family who bothered to watch it. I had just turned seventeen and had learned enough economics to know it would not work, so I sat alone in the family room yelling “Fascist!” at the TV screen (economically speaking, it was kind of fascistic).

    (I ended up voting for the fascist fifteen months later on the grounds that McGoo was a socialist and, more important, even dumber than Nixon.)

    Dave Miller in Sacramento

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    I remember thinking "How can you do this? What if a guy's costs go up? He can't raise prices ... he'll be squeezed out of business? Does this mean a guy can't get a raise? What if a guy is doing a good job and deserves a raise?"

    I was barely a teenager, with no economic theory other than "life", but the collision of micro reality--which requires flexibility--against macro policy here was pretty obvious. My parents, who'd been through war time rationing were much more amenable to this sort of nonsense.

    It was a weird time. But ...

    just sort of screwy, nothing like *suicidal insanity* of Merkel and elites deny bleedingly obvious basic biological and cultural realities and screw up the West in a way that can't be fixed short of civil war and genocide.
  3. The contemporaneous free float of the dollar seems a much more important event. The resurgence of inflation in 1972 had more to do with that, an economic boom and an indulgent Fed (not unconnected with Nixon’s reelection). In fact, it sounds ridiculous to compare the wage and price controls to Merkel’s actions either for importance or for perniciousness (unless you are a libertarian fanatic to whom they are blasphemous).

  4. In the UK, ‘Bonanza’ was relegated to a graveyard Sunday afternoon TV slot on BBC1, when it was assumed most of the viewership was either asleep, pursuing hobbies, doing homework or eating Sunday lunch.

    • Replies: @SFG
    It's our (former) national myth, not yours. Makes sense.
    , @syonredux
    Bonanza ratings during the period in question:

    Season Twelve...1970-1971
    Number #9 in the ratings, just
    inside the top ten, as this was
    Bonanza's last consecutive season,
    after David Canary's departure.

    Season Thirteen...1971-1972
    Number #20 in the ratings, well
    out of the top ten category, as
    the stories were losing their power
    and production was falling behind
    at times. The lowest ratings number
    since 1960.

    Season Fourteen...1972-1973
    In it's first month in September, in
    the Top 15, and then by October,
    out of the Top 25, and after the
    October 31st broadcast into the first
    week of November, had sunk to #52
    and was cancelled by NBC Television,
    a few days later on November 3rd.
     
    http://ponderosascenery.homestead.com/ratings.html
    , @syonredux
    Should be borne in mind that "Are You Being Served?" made its debut in 1972....and stayed in production until 1985....

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unmkX15AeN8


    Not exactly a high-water mark for Anglo humor...

    , @Thomas Fuller
    That may be because the scripts in Bonanza had some severe technical problems, eloquently described here:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psoaCxQ6u5w

    It was every bit as daft as The High Chaparral, which is saying quite a lot.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HqBInlTQHaU

    As for wage/price controls, they were tried in 1960s Britain by the Labour government and were, like pretty much all their policies, spectacularly ineffectual.
  5. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Steve, it’s not as simple and clear cut as that.
    As F. Scott Fitzgerald might have said, ‘the political class are not the same as us, they are different’.

    You make the grave, grave mistake of assuming that politicians are rational. That is *the* fundamental and elementary error.
    No, Steve, they are not rational. Yes, I know that ‘power’ is the name of the game, that’s what they’ve all been striving and fighting each for like the proverbial ‘ferrets-in-a-sack’ since boyhood, and thus one would have thought that a politician would desperate.y cling to power like a drowning man is said to grasp a straw, but your analysis lacks one vital insight. The name of that insight is ‘vanity’.
    Yes, power for the sake of power is great. Why else would the Ceaucescus and Gaddafi cling on for so long and hopelessly? Yes, think of of the ultimate high of absolute power. Being able to have King Farouk-like sex-lives. Hob nobbing with the great and good. Nobel prizes. Accolades and honors, the theater which that Tom Fool, Gorbachev craved so much – think of the absurdity of that ‘communist’ following the mace in procession in Britain’s feudal House of Lords.
    No it’s vanity. All is vanity. What politicians crave above all is being toasted and feted as being ‘smart’. That’s what they are really after.
    Unfortunately, they all have the notion that the way to do this is by following the editorial line of ‘The Economist’ magazine.

  6. David Stockman says breaking the link to gold was the big blunder of that night-it led to the out-of-control debt we have today. Freidman was for *that*, since he thought that a workable gold standard was never politically feasible.

    • Replies: @Steve Richter

    David Stockman says breaking the link to gold was the big blunder of that night
     
    But if we stayed on gold wouldn't that cause deflation? As production and the population increases and the amount of money stays the same prices have to fall. Which makes it profitable for people to hold onto their money since tomorrow a gold coin can buy more stuff than it does today.

    Stockman has been predicting financial ruin for a number of years now. Has he adjusted his thinking, acknowledged that he was wrong?
  7. @fnn
    David Stockman says breaking the link to gold was the big blunder of that night-it led to the out-of-control debt we have today. Freidman was for *that*, since he thought that a workable gold standard was never politically feasible.

    David Stockman says breaking the link to gold was the big blunder of that night

    But if we stayed on gold wouldn’t that cause deflation? As production and the population increases and the amount of money stays the same prices have to fall. Which makes it profitable for people to hold onto their money since tomorrow a gold coin can buy more stuff than it does today.

    Stockman has been predicting financial ruin for a number of years now. Has he adjusted his thinking, acknowledged that he was wrong?

    • Replies: @Blobby5
    Schiff once asked Taleb to give him one example of when people would defer gratification in purchasing in the hopes of a small percent reduction in the following year. In fact many buy on credit, so there are few rational actors.

    The gold supply increases about 3 percent a year, what Friedman wanted anyway.

    James Grant also speaks of the alleged boogeyman of deflation, it is helpful to most but dangerous to governments and bankers.
    , @Anonymous
    Haven't we got financial ruin?
    , @advancedatheist
    Libertarians can't seem to get their story straight. The gold standard and the cornucopianism of natural resources make contradictory assumptions about Element 79 in the Periodic Table.

    You even see this contradiction in Ayn Rand's novel Atlas Shrugged. The productive heroes in a free economy could produce arbitrarily large supplies of copper, coal, petroleum, steel, railroad capacity, etc., but they couldn't do this trick with gold for some reason.
    , @Anonymous
    But if we stayed on gold wouldn’t that cause deflation? As production and the population increases and the amount of money stays the same prices have to fall.

    A lower price is a good thing. It means a higher standard of living.
  8. Any possibility that Merkel’s way of doing things is actually a smart way of avoiding the boiling-frog trap? After all, Germany admitted a large number of Turks over the years without generating anything as memorable as the Cologne grope-a-thon.

    This wasn’t the only instant-feedback social experiment of 2015. You had De Blasio’s denunciation of the NYPD almost instantly followed by cop funerals. You had the remarkable multi-city Instant Crime Wave just when politicians felt it safe to side with the protesters.

    If your opponents policies are doomed to fail, wouldn’t you prefer the failure to be quick and spectacular?

    • Replies: @SFG
    It may work out that way, but I doubt it. 'I'm going to do X so it fails and everyone then wants not-X' is great in movies, but usually if a politician does something and it fails big-time, they often lose their jobs. Politicians like power. It's like those conspiracy theories where Bill Clinton is paying Trump to run so he'll lose and his wife will become President. Unlikely, but you have to admit it would make a great movie.
    , @snorlax
    It doesn't work that way. It's impossible for leftist policies to fail quickly and spectacularly. I mean, they do, but the media will do everything in their power to cover up the failure. This of course includes fictional media maybe even more so than the news media.

    99.9%+ of people do not read Steve Sailer, so they get their information on what the media covers up only through the slow trickle of word-of-mouth and the occasional mealy-mouthed months-after-the-fact admissions by media outlets. For most people what's on the TV is more "real" than real life.

  9. One should remember that guys like J.K. Galbraith, who actually ran the wartime Office of Price Administration ,was the best selling economic writer of the era. The Philips Curve was taught in every economics 101 text and actually believed to be true ( it still is at the Fed). The American labor force was heavily unionized and not just AFSCME or Federal employees. If the UAW, UMW or steelworkers went on strike it was economically crippling. Nixon was a man of those times and if wage and price controls seem a bizarre policy today it wasn’t a ‘globalized’ world then.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Funny thing is that Nixon was employed to regulate tire prices during WWII from which he developed a distaste for price controls.
  10. @Steve Richter
    I understand less about the economy than ever before. The Fed is loaning money at zero %? Who is borrowing it? And why do they not borrow more and speculate with it? If import tariffs are bad why does the Chinese economy do so well? Why has the price of gold not continued to increase as the Peter Schiffs have predicted? Why no inflation despite federal deficit spending and central bank zero interest rates?

    Why has the price of gold not continued to increase as the Peter Schiffs have predicted?

    I’ve never seen gold really discussed on ISteve before now. I’d like to hear from this group their thoughts. Gold’s a mystery to me, this thing that libertarians and Indians concern themselves with.

    • Replies: @Blobby5
    Part of it is the Comex determines the price, there are an estimated 280 paper ounces per actual physical ounce, like musical chairs, all are content until the music stops and the paper chicanery is exposed.
    , @bomag
    Well, gold is commodity not unlike many others.

    We could run a modern economy by pricing things off one single commodity; but modern bookkeeping allows us to base our currency off a basket of commodities; generally a far better thing than using just one commodity.
  11. I never quite understood why the leftist press and the SWPL hated Nixon so much. He was pretty leftist in how he ran things what with the EPA and affirmative action. Did they hold his earlier Red baiting against him?

    • Replies: @2Mintzin1
    Nixon was a Republican.
    , @Curle
    Vietnam for one. His anti-Soviet past. Law and order for another. federalizing the drug war. I think he also spoke out against school busing.
    , @Gato de la Biblioteca
    Besides other reasons mentioned, it was also because he was a physically & stylistically unattractive man. The left loves their heroes to be attractive & stylish, thus the never ending love affair with JFK. It would also help with the left if Nixon had been born rich. The left loves poverty in the abstract, but not in person.
    , @Jean Cocteausten
    Nixon said he would get us out of Vietnam, but then he invaded Cambodia. The left didn't care about anything else in those days. They'd have voted for George Wallace if he'd run on an anti war platform.
    , @Pomegranate
    He won the Vietnam War, forcing the democrat dominated Congress to defund military aid to ARVN after the Easter Offensive. This more than anything else shifted the military and especially officers permanently away from the Democratic Party. To a classicist, ensuring the absolute loyalty of the officer class to your political party is a major coup. I'm sure Nixon and some of the smarter dems realized that, but public reeducation has essentially buried that historical event.
    , @Anonymous
    Nixon was also favorable to civil rights legislation in the 50s, while LBJ was adamantly opposed to civil rights as a leading Senator.
    , @Karl
    >>> I never quite understood why the leftist press and the SWPL hated Nixon so much

    When the Democrat didn't get elected, the Left didn't get government jobs.

    It REALLY IS mostly as simple as that.

    There is very little complexity in life. In fact, there is very little complexity in anything except Quantum physics. And you can live with a lot less tranquilizer-prescription expense, by assuming that Quantum physics doesn't really exist.
    , @Stephen R. Diamond

    Did they hold his earlier Red baiting against him?
     
    Yes.
  12. The difference here is that Nixon was faced with the breakdown of the global currency system in the midst of a protracted war with Russia. The currency war triggered by the French left Nixon with no good options. It was also well received by the public so it was good politics. It forced an end to the currency war and forced the G-10 to accept limits on future devaluations.

    Frankly, this is a terrible analogy. Nixon was not run out of town due to economics. He was run out of town because he pissed off the Left in the 50’s and 60’s with his red hunting and defense of Whittaker Chambers.

    • Agree: Jim Don Bob
    • Replies: @Blobby5
    I wouldn't blame the French, there were too many chits outstanding for the available gold, they merely tried to collect.
  13. By making this comparison, you seem to be assuming Merkel made a boner motivated in great part by economics, a desire to remedy Germany’s looming labor shortage, and rejuvenate its aging demographics. But what role was a played by desire to wipe out the Nazi strain once and for all, by ending or submerging the “German nation.” ? I know that sounds outlandish, except I can’t imagine how someone smart enough to run Germany could be so stupid as to believe in the nonsense of motivation #1. Economics is hard, understanding that an influx of uneducated young men from another, lesser , culture won’t work is easy. Isn’t it?

    • Replies: @TG
    Ah, but the seduction of cheap labor is so hard for the elites to avoid, no matter how dangerous it may be for the society at large. There is an enormous amount of money to be made now, and the POSSIBILITY that it will be bad years or decades down the road… humans have trouble avoiding being seduced by this.

    The Roman emperor Valens imported a bunch of barbarians to lower his labor costs - and was killed when they revolted. More recently the elites of the Ivory Coast imported large numbers of muslim refugees to lower their labor costs in their plantations - and by the time this immigration had doubled the population the country was torn apart in a civil war. And so on.

    Economics is not that hard. Supply and demand. Creating massive poverty is very profitable for the elites today, but often results in social instability down the road.

    It's very hard to go wrong by following the money.
    , @Glaivester
    Maybe, as some on VDARE have suggested, Merkel was bribed?
  14. Funny how Yergin didn’t mention LBJ’s guns AND butter spending as cause of inflation.

    How is this any different from anti price ‘gouging’ laws after disasters? Price controls = shortage. All lessons haven’t been learned.

    • Replies: @dearieme
    "LBJ’s guns AND butter spending as cause of ..." many of the world's economic troubles ever since. Nixon's price control policy was daft, but unless he'd rolled back LBJ's welfare state, and closed down the Vietnam war faster and more cheaply than he did, he was bound to find himself facing a choice of bad options.
  15. @nglaer
    By making this comparison, you seem to be assuming Merkel made a boner motivated in great part by economics, a desire to remedy Germany's looming labor shortage, and rejuvenate its aging demographics. But what role was a played by desire to wipe out the Nazi strain once and for all, by ending or submerging the "German nation." ? I know that sounds outlandish, except I can't imagine how someone smart enough to run Germany could be so stupid as to believe in the nonsense of motivation #1. Economics is hard, understanding that an influx of uneducated young men from another, lesser , culture won't work is easy. Isn't it?

    Ah, but the seduction of cheap labor is so hard for the elites to avoid, no matter how dangerous it may be for the society at large. There is an enormous amount of money to be made now, and the POSSIBILITY that it will be bad years or decades down the road… humans have trouble avoiding being seduced by this.

    The Roman emperor Valens imported a bunch of barbarians to lower his labor costs – and was killed when they revolted. More recently the elites of the Ivory Coast imported large numbers of muslim refugees to lower their labor costs in their plantations – and by the time this immigration had doubled the population the country was torn apart in a civil war. And so on.

    Economics is not that hard. Supply and demand. Creating massive poverty is very profitable for the elites today, but often results in social instability down the road.

    It’s very hard to go wrong by following the money.

    • Replies: @SFG
    Yes and no. 'It's all money' tends to be a mistake of the Left, as opposed to the Right which tends to see tribal motivations where money is involved. Of course, people do things for a variety of reasons. It's similar to the Sailerian argument that human outcomes are nature and nurture versus the MSM view that it's all nurture.

    I'm not Merkel (or I would have closed the borders to Muslims claiming the threat of a wave of anti-Semitism ;) ), but seems to me there is some component of the old desire to 'do good by doing well', to satisfy selfish and selfless motives at once. The idea is that by accepting foreign immigrants from a disparate culture, Germany can cleanse itself of the stain of its Nazi past, as well as gain enough young workers to support its aging population. The problems are obvious--rape gangs in Cologne--but there you have it.

    Comments from people who actually live or work in Germany welcome.
  16. @Steve Richter

    David Stockman says breaking the link to gold was the big blunder of that night
     
    But if we stayed on gold wouldn't that cause deflation? As production and the population increases and the amount of money stays the same prices have to fall. Which makes it profitable for people to hold onto their money since tomorrow a gold coin can buy more stuff than it does today.

    Stockman has been predicting financial ruin for a number of years now. Has he adjusted his thinking, acknowledged that he was wrong?

    Schiff once asked Taleb to give him one example of when people would defer gratification in purchasing in the hopes of a small percent reduction in the following year. In fact many buy on credit, so there are few rational actors.

    The gold supply increases about 3 percent a year, what Friedman wanted anyway.

    James Grant also speaks of the alleged boogeyman of deflation, it is helpful to most but dangerous to governments and bankers.

    • Agree: Travis
    • Replies: @advancedatheist

    the alleged boogeyman of deflation, it is helpful to most but dangerous to governments and bankers.

     

    How so? Deflation transfers wealth from borrowers to lenders, namely, bankers, because the borrowers have to come up with money that increases in value over time to pay their loans.
    , @Flip
    1.5% actually.
  17. All in the Family: Season 2, Episode 11
    The Man in the Street (4 Dec. 1971)

    Storyline

    Archie comes home in a good mood because, while at work, he was interviewed by CBS for his opinion on the Nixon administration. After dinner he gathers the family around the television only to find that the set is busted. While Mike and Edith try to find a repairman who is working late, Gloria tries to find at least one neighbor that Archie hasn’t offended who will let him borrow their set. A repairman comes by and gives Archie a diagnosis but can’t fix it because he is Jewish and can’t work after sundown on Friday. Finally, Archie takes the family down to Kelsey’s Bar and just as the broadcast begins it is pre-empted by a speech from Nixon himself.

    Quotes

    [when a presidential speech interrupts his TV show]
    Archie Bunker: Aww, geez… if Nixon keeps goin’ on like that, he won’t have Archie Bunker to kick around anymore.

  18. Wage and price controls gave us several novel names for steaks, free from controls.

    Anyone ever have a hanger steak? My current favorite. Deep beefy flavor, quick to cook, tender. Skirt and flank steak used to be cheap but with carne asada so popular it costs almost as much as ribeye. Hanger steak is cheaper than sirloin and much better, especially on a steak salad. Sirloin only gets tender with a long sous vide soak, and I don’t have time for that.

    Steak talk is more interesting than Nixon.

    • Replies: @dearieme
    What is a "hanger steak"? Does it just mean a steak from beef that has been properly hung? How deeply unamerican.
  19. @unit472
    One should remember that guys like J.K. Galbraith, who actually ran the wartime Office of Price Administration ,was the best selling economic writer of the era. The Philips Curve was taught in every economics 101 text and actually believed to be true ( it still is at the Fed). The American labor force was heavily unionized and not just AFSCME or Federal employees. If the UAW, UMW or steelworkers went on strike it was economically crippling. Nixon was a man of those times and if wage and price controls seem a bizarre policy today it wasn't a 'globalized' world then.

    Funny thing is that Nixon was employed to regulate tire prices during WWII from which he developed a distaste for price controls.

    • Replies: @tbraton
    "Funny thing is that Nixon was employed to regulate tire prices during WWII from which he developed a distaste for price controls."

    I thought he was in the Navy during WWII, so I decided to look it up. According to Wikipedia, "He was assigned to the tire rationing division, where he was tasked with replying to correspondence. He did not enjoy the role, and four months later, applied to join the United States Navy." Four months of writing correspondence is not exactly like regulating tire prices. I doubt very much he played much of a role in doing that.
    , @Winthorp
    Steve, on the intersection of immigration and price controls, have you read this post (see comments, too) by Nick Rowe?

    http://worthwhile.typepad.com/worthwhile_canadian_initi/2015/10/countries-as-clubs-open-borders-and-debtgdp-ratios.html

    His posts on immigration are quite good. He reads Cochran, Razib, and others - probably you, too.

    In general, I think the HBD neck of the woods tends to suffer from bad macroeconomics (Pseudoerasmus is a notable counterexample), so I love it whenever the econ blogosphere productively crosses streams with the realist blogosphere.

  20. @Flip
    I never quite understood why the leftist press and the SWPL hated Nixon so much. He was pretty leftist in how he ran things what with the EPA and affirmative action. Did they hold his earlier Red baiting against him?

    Nixon was a Republican.

    • Replies: @Realist
    "Nixon was a Republican."

    But he was not a conservative. He was a big government advocate.

  21. @Anonymous
    In the UK, 'Bonanza' was relegated to a graveyard Sunday afternoon TV slot on BBC1, when it was assumed most of the viewership was either asleep, pursuing hobbies, doing homework or eating Sunday lunch.

    It’s our (former) national myth, not yours. Makes sense.

  22. @Vinay
    Any possibility that Merkel's way of doing things is actually a smart way of avoiding the boiling-frog trap? After all, Germany admitted a large number of Turks over the years without generating anything as memorable as the Cologne grope-a-thon.

    This wasn't the only instant-feedback social experiment of 2015. You had De Blasio's denunciation of the NYPD almost instantly followed by cop funerals. You had the remarkable multi-city Instant Crime Wave just when politicians felt it safe to side with the protesters.

    If your opponents policies are doomed to fail, wouldn't you prefer the failure to be quick and spectacular?

    It may work out that way, but I doubt it. ‘I’m going to do X so it fails and everyone then wants not-X’ is great in movies, but usually if a politician does something and it fails big-time, they often lose their jobs. Politicians like power. It’s like those conspiracy theories where Bill Clinton is paying Trump to run so he’ll lose and his wife will become President. Unlikely, but you have to admit it would make a great movie.

    • Replies: @Palerider1861
    Regarding Herr Trump -

    I considered the possibility that in the beginning of his campaign he was a shill for Hillary, however, if he was, he is no longer.

    The groundswell of support across demographic lines for Mr Trump is so great (and growing) that, were he to somehow throw the election to Hillary, he would go down as probably the greatest rogue in American history.

    Knowing what I do of Donald Trump's background and business savvy, I am confident that among all the current candidates, he is the only one with any chance at making "America Great Again!"
  23. Humiliating loss of office Ceaușescu style would be better. No matter how brutal he was, at least the Romanian people are still Romanian.

  24. @TG
    Ah, but the seduction of cheap labor is so hard for the elites to avoid, no matter how dangerous it may be for the society at large. There is an enormous amount of money to be made now, and the POSSIBILITY that it will be bad years or decades down the road… humans have trouble avoiding being seduced by this.

    The Roman emperor Valens imported a bunch of barbarians to lower his labor costs - and was killed when they revolted. More recently the elites of the Ivory Coast imported large numbers of muslim refugees to lower their labor costs in their plantations - and by the time this immigration had doubled the population the country was torn apart in a civil war. And so on.

    Economics is not that hard. Supply and demand. Creating massive poverty is very profitable for the elites today, but often results in social instability down the road.

    It's very hard to go wrong by following the money.

    Yes and no. ‘It’s all money’ tends to be a mistake of the Left, as opposed to the Right which tends to see tribal motivations where money is involved. Of course, people do things for a variety of reasons. It’s similar to the Sailerian argument that human outcomes are nature and nurture versus the MSM view that it’s all nurture.

    I’m not Merkel (or I would have closed the borders to Muslims claiming the threat of a wave of anti-Semitism 😉 ), but seems to me there is some component of the old desire to ‘do good by doing well’, to satisfy selfish and selfless motives at once. The idea is that by accepting foreign immigrants from a disparate culture, Germany can cleanse itself of the stain of its Nazi past, as well as gain enough young workers to support its aging population. The problems are obvious–rape gangs in Cologne–but there you have it.

    Comments from people who actually live or work in Germany welcome.

    • Replies: @unpc downunder
    I'd agree it's probably a bit of both. If the powers that be in Germany only wanted cheap labour they could bring in more docile Christian and Buddhist workers from South East Asia or Latin America, or smarter workers from China and India.

    However, while that would satisfy the economists on the liberal right, it wouldn't satisfy the liberal left who are more interested in helping refugees and creating job opportunities for government workers.
    , @Big Bill
    If the Germans bring in a million+ horny Muslim males 20-35 years of age (sans women), who on earth is going to sexually service them? A few furtive holiday gang groping are the least of their problems going forward.

    If they really want to solve the problem of public fondling and rape with (what used to be) typical hard-headed German efficiency and rationality, they need to establish a federal Comfort Woman Corps and set up "Comfort Stations" across the country.
    , @TangoMan
    Germany can cleanse itself of the stain of its Nazi past

    I forgive the Germans for their past and I'm sure a lot of other people do too. Frankly I never hear people tarring Germans for their past. Older generations who had to fight the Nazis and suffer under them are dying off and they're the ones who held the biggest grudges.

    I'd rather that Germany remain German - I'll benefit personally from that outcome whereas Germany being lost to the world in order to remove some stain from the German soul gives me no benefit at all.
  25. @Steve Richter

    David Stockman says breaking the link to gold was the big blunder of that night
     
    But if we stayed on gold wouldn't that cause deflation? As production and the population increases and the amount of money stays the same prices have to fall. Which makes it profitable for people to hold onto their money since tomorrow a gold coin can buy more stuff than it does today.

    Stockman has been predicting financial ruin for a number of years now. Has he adjusted his thinking, acknowledged that he was wrong?

    Haven’t we got financial ruin?

  26. @Steve Sailer
    Funny thing is that Nixon was employed to regulate tire prices during WWII from which he developed a distaste for price controls.

    “Funny thing is that Nixon was employed to regulate tire prices during WWII from which he developed a distaste for price controls.”

    I thought he was in the Navy during WWII, so I decided to look it up. According to Wikipedia, “He was assigned to the tire rationing division, where he was tasked with replying to correspondence. He did not enjoy the role, and four months later, applied to join the United States Navy.” Four months of writing correspondence is not exactly like regulating tire prices. I doubt very much he played much of a role in doing that.

  27. I thought that Time cover looked like the work of Jack Davis of MAD Magazine fame. You can make out his signature next to the housewife’s leg: http://content.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,19730409,00.html

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
    What a coincidence. Jack Davis did a Bonanza cover illustration for the August 14-20, 1971 issue of TV Guide:
    http://www.tvguidemagazine.com/archive/suboffer/1970s/1971/19710814_c1.jpg.html

    Richard Nixon then preempted Bonanza Sunday evening August 15th with his speech:
    http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=3115
  28. @yaqub the mad scientist
    Why has the price of gold not continued to increase as the Peter Schiffs have predicted?

    I've never seen gold really discussed on ISteve before now. I'd like to hear from this group their thoughts. Gold's a mystery to me, this thing that libertarians and Indians concern themselves with.

    Part of it is the Comex determines the price, there are an estimated 280 paper ounces per actual physical ounce, like musical chairs, all are content until the music stops and the paper chicanery is exposed.

  29. The Nixon and Merkel administrations intentionally caused the problems they were (are) put in a bind to fix. In 1972 US federal spending went up over 10%. The DoD ordered multiple years’ worth of everything from trucks to toilet paper in an effort to create an economic boomlet that would sweep Nixon back into office. In the same year the money supply grew by 9%. Who could have seen inflation coming?

  30. @The Z Blog
    The difference here is that Nixon was faced with the breakdown of the global currency system in the midst of a protracted war with Russia. The currency war triggered by the French left Nixon with no good options. It was also well received by the public so it was good politics. It forced an end to the currency war and forced the G-10 to accept limits on future devaluations.

    Frankly, this is a terrible analogy. Nixon was not run out of town due to economics. He was run out of town because he pissed off the Left in the 50's and 60's with his red hunting and defense of Whittaker Chambers.

    I wouldn’t blame the French, there were too many chits outstanding for the available gold, they merely tried to collect.

  31. “I was for it. (In my defense, I was 12.)”

    I was for it too, and I was about the same age.

    Then I had an assignment in school to type a letter, so I wrote to President Nixon suggesting permanent daylight saving time as a way to save energy. That was during the OPEC oil embargo and our nation’s first energy crisis.

    That was the beginning of my tradition of useless writing.

    My resolution for 2016 is to hardly ever comment on anything.

    • Replies: @Curle
    "My resolution for 2016 is to hardly ever comment on anything."

    If you're a conservative of any kind or simply white and a contributor to the public fisk nobody with a public megaphone wants to hear from you anyway. But, if you change your mind and want to be listened to, I suggest you undergo a gender change. Seems like a few attention seeking formerly ignored white men have found this a useful route.
    , @Gato de la Biblioteca
    I made the same resolution last year. Didn't work. One day's resolve is nothing compared to a lifetime of habit.
  32. @Flip
    I never quite understood why the leftist press and the SWPL hated Nixon so much. He was pretty leftist in how he ran things what with the EPA and affirmative action. Did they hold his earlier Red baiting against him?

    Vietnam for one. His anti-Soviet past. Law and order for another. federalizing the drug war. I think he also spoke out against school busing.

    • Replies: @Busby
    People forget how big an issue busing was in the late 60s early 70s. Americans in big cities would put up with a lot of government imposed crap, but neighborhood schools were a part of the national secular faith. Suddenly federal judges were telling you your seven year old son had to take a 45 minute bus ride to school instead of walking three blocks. Because punishing you was the only way to redress 200 years of racism. Smart Power.
    , @The Z Blog
    Nixon also threatened the Yankee domination of politics with his Southern strategy. If you think of American Progressivism as an outgrowth of Public Protestantism, it makes a little more sense. Progressives, like their spiritual forebears, hate everything "southern" so a guy like Nixon playing to southern whites was a click away from devil worship. They hated Bush the Minor for the same reason. He was a WASP who was a traitor to his people by declaring himself a Texan and becoming evangelical.
  33. @Buzz Mohawk

    "I was for it. (In my defense, I was 12.)"
     
    I was for it too, and I was about the same age.

    Then I had an assignment in school to type a letter, so I wrote to President Nixon suggesting permanent daylight saving time as a way to save energy. That was during the OPEC oil embargo and our nation's first energy crisis.

    That was the beginning of my tradition of useless writing.

    My resolution for 2016 is to hardly ever comment on anything.

    “My resolution for 2016 is to hardly ever comment on anything.”

    If you’re a conservative of any kind or simply white and a contributor to the public fisk nobody with a public megaphone wants to hear from you anyway. But, if you change your mind and want to be listened to, I suggest you undergo a gender change. Seems like a few attention seeking formerly ignored white men have found this a useful route.

  34. @Flip
    I never quite understood why the leftist press and the SWPL hated Nixon so much. He was pretty leftist in how he ran things what with the EPA and affirmative action. Did they hold his earlier Red baiting against him?

    Besides other reasons mentioned, it was also because he was a physically & stylistically unattractive man. The left loves their heroes to be attractive & stylish, thus the never ending love affair with JFK. It would also help with the left if Nixon had been born rich. The left loves poverty in the abstract, but not in person.

    • Replies: @Sam Haysom
    Nixon actually wasn't that bad looking a guy. Honestly until he started getting old he was actually pretty attractive for a politician in that era. He was certainly better looking than Lyndon Johnson. To my mind the "ugliness" of Nixon was attributed based on the lefts hatred for him not the other way around. Because Nixon was the locus for their hatred of course he was ugly in their minds.
  35. @Buzz Mohawk

    "I was for it. (In my defense, I was 12.)"
     
    I was for it too, and I was about the same age.

    Then I had an assignment in school to type a letter, so I wrote to President Nixon suggesting permanent daylight saving time as a way to save energy. That was during the OPEC oil embargo and our nation's first energy crisis.

    That was the beginning of my tradition of useless writing.

    My resolution for 2016 is to hardly ever comment on anything.

    I made the same resolution last year. Didn’t work. One day’s resolve is nothing compared to a lifetime of habit.

  36. @Curle
    Vietnam for one. His anti-Soviet past. Law and order for another. federalizing the drug war. I think he also spoke out against school busing.

    People forget how big an issue busing was in the late 60s early 70s. Americans in big cities would put up with a lot of government imposed crap, but neighborhood schools were a part of the national secular faith. Suddenly federal judges were telling you your seven year old son had to take a 45 minute bus ride to school instead of walking three blocks. Because punishing you was the only way to redress 200 years of racism. Smart Power.

    • Replies: @Curle
    It didn't help that adding black students to the classroom only lowered the likelihood of learning occurring. Parents understood this. Word got around and not all teachers of that era were Lefty loons, at least not in the South. I was bused and my mom told me years later she couldn't believe the stories I'd bring back from school. Parents compared notes and discovered they were all hearing the same remarkable stories (black students who couldn't read, wouldn't pay attention, etc.). This was an era when discipline was strictly imposed on white children by their parents and expected out of the school system (we had to close the education gap with the Soviets after all). It is also a big reason people fled to the suburbs and explains the creation of new cities (and thus school districts) in the suburban south as well as the growth in private schools.
  37. @Flip
    I never quite understood why the leftist press and the SWPL hated Nixon so much. He was pretty leftist in how he ran things what with the EPA and affirmative action. Did they hold his earlier Red baiting against him?

    Nixon said he would get us out of Vietnam, but then he invaded Cambodia. The left didn’t care about anything else in those days. They’d have voted for George Wallace if he’d run on an anti war platform.

    • Replies: @Sam Haysom
    I don't really buy this. Opposition to the war on college campuses basically collapsed when Nixon rescinded the draft.

    I would actually argue that when Nixon was president he actually wasn't that hated by the left. The old left/ red diaper baby hatred of Nixon for nailing Hiss had subsided by 68 and the New Left/ Boomer nostlagic hatred for Nixon hadn't yet crystallized. If Nixon hadn't angered Martha Grahmn by denying her FCC licenses he probally would have skated on Watergate.

    That said the landslide election in 72 terrified the left so that probally reignited Nixon hatred on the left, but during his first term at least Nixon was hated by the left only as much as any Republican would have been hated.
  38. @yaqub the mad scientist
    Why has the price of gold not continued to increase as the Peter Schiffs have predicted?

    I've never seen gold really discussed on ISteve before now. I'd like to hear from this group their thoughts. Gold's a mystery to me, this thing that libertarians and Indians concern themselves with.

    Well, gold is commodity not unlike many others.

    We could run a modern economy by pricing things off one single commodity; but modern bookkeeping allows us to base our currency off a basket of commodities; generally a far better thing than using just one commodity.

    • Replies: @Blobby5
    Have to disagree with the 'basket of commodities', gold is a tried and true money for centuries. Many government gold standards have been frauds, thus giving the true thing a black eye.
  39. re: Vinay – So really Merkel, whether intentionally or not, is doing the West a favor by bringing this whole mass third-world immigration issue to a head?

    • Replies: @Luke Lea

    So really Merkel, whether intentionally or not, is doing the West a favor by bringing this whole third-world mass immigration issue to a head?
     
    She should be burned at the stake and then sainted in retrospect.
  40. @PhysicistDave
    Steve,

    I remember the speech, too, although my memory is that it was in late afternoon (Central time): I was the only member of my family who bothered to watch it. I had just turned seventeen and had learned enough economics to know it would not work, so I sat alone in the family room yelling "Fascist!" at the TV screen (economically speaking, it was kind of fascistic).

    (I ended up voting for the fascist fifteen months later on the grounds that McGoo was a socialist and, more important, even dumber than Nixon.)

    Dave Miller in Sacramento

    I remember thinking “How can you do this? What if a guy’s costs go up? He can’t raise prices … he’ll be squeezed out of business? Does this mean a guy can’t get a raise? What if a guy is doing a good job and deserves a raise?”

    I was barely a teenager, with no economic theory other than “life”, but the collision of micro reality–which requires flexibility–against macro policy here was pretty obvious. My parents, who’d been through war time rationing were much more amenable to this sort of nonsense.

    It was a weird time. But …

    just sort of screwy, nothing like *suicidal insanity* of Merkel and elites deny bleedingly obvious basic biological and cultural realities and screw up the West in a way that can’t be fixed short of civil war and genocide.

    • Replies: @Rob McX

    It was a weird time. But …

    just sort of screwy, nothing like *suicidal insanity* of Merkel and elites deny bleedingly obvious basic biological and cultural realities and screw up the West in a way that can’t be fixed short of civil war and genocide.
     
    I have to say I see no parallels either between Nixon's and Merkel's actions. If there's a precedent for Mutti Merkel in the 1970s, it would be someone like this guy.
  41. It is not at all clear that politicians learned anything from this debacle. It would appear that the antics of the Fed in the last 30 years have caused a much greater crisis than wage and price controls, but those antics remain highly popular with the political class.
    But ultimately, closing the gold window will prove to be fatal…

    • Agree: Travis
  42. @Luke Lea
    re: Vinay - So really Merkel, whether intentionally or not, is doing the West a favor by bringing this whole mass third-world immigration issue to a head?

    So really Merkel, whether intentionally or not, is doing the West a favor by bringing this whole third-world mass immigration issue to a head?

    She should be burned at the stake and then sainted in retrospect.

    • Replies: @Travis
    it is possible Merkel's boner will help Trump defeat Clinton.

    The problems caused by the influx of muslim migrants into Europe should convince Americans to fight against allowing massive muslim immigration into America. A smart politician like Trump will know how to use the raping of European women by the invading muslims to his advantage.

    unfortunately it is too late for Germany, but watching their nation self-destruct may convince politicians in other nations to restrict immigration.
  43. @Curle
    Vietnam for one. His anti-Soviet past. Law and order for another. federalizing the drug war. I think he also spoke out against school busing.

    Nixon also threatened the Yankee domination of politics with his Southern strategy. If you think of American Progressivism as an outgrowth of Public Protestantism, it makes a little more sense. Progressives, like their spiritual forebears, hate everything “southern” so a guy like Nixon playing to southern whites was a click away from devil worship. They hated Bush the Minor for the same reason. He was a WASP who was a traitor to his people by declaring himself a Texan and becoming evangelical.

  44. @Steve Richter

    David Stockman says breaking the link to gold was the big blunder of that night
     
    But if we stayed on gold wouldn't that cause deflation? As production and the population increases and the amount of money stays the same prices have to fall. Which makes it profitable for people to hold onto their money since tomorrow a gold coin can buy more stuff than it does today.

    Stockman has been predicting financial ruin for a number of years now. Has he adjusted his thinking, acknowledged that he was wrong?

    Libertarians can’t seem to get their story straight. The gold standard and the cornucopianism of natural resources make contradictory assumptions about Element 79 in the Periodic Table.

    You even see this contradiction in Ayn Rand’s novel Atlas Shrugged. The productive heroes in a free economy could produce arbitrarily large supplies of copper, coal, petroleum, steel, railroad capacity, etc., but they couldn’t do this trick with gold for some reason.

  45. OT:

    I’m watching North Dakota State win their fifth straight FCS title game. (Currently they are winning 17-0). On their two TDs, on both plays I counted 11/11 players on the field as white. The defense looks a little more vibrant, only about 8/11 white.

  46. @Blobby5
    Schiff once asked Taleb to give him one example of when people would defer gratification in purchasing in the hopes of a small percent reduction in the following year. In fact many buy on credit, so there are few rational actors.

    The gold supply increases about 3 percent a year, what Friedman wanted anyway.

    James Grant also speaks of the alleged boogeyman of deflation, it is helpful to most but dangerous to governments and bankers.

    the alleged boogeyman of deflation, it is helpful to most but dangerous to governments and bankers.

    How so? Deflation transfers wealth from borrowers to lenders, namely, bankers, because the borrowers have to come up with money that increases in value over time to pay their loans.

    • Replies: @Flip
    Not really since it makes it harder for banks to collect on their loans and they owe their depositors as well. I think banks do best with mild inflation.
    , @Blobby5
    Government loves inflation because they can make promises paid for through the indirect taxation that is inflation.

    Defining deflation as 'debt destruction' allows a bank to repo collateral, they end up with a hard asset that they paid for through a fractional reserve loan, essentially a book keeping entry. The Fed owns trillions in MBS, they conjured the money to pay for them, but they now own the underlying asset.
  47. @Steve Richter
    I understand less about the economy than ever before. The Fed is loaning money at zero %? Who is borrowing it? And why do they not borrow more and speculate with it? If import tariffs are bad why does the Chinese economy do so well? Why has the price of gold not continued to increase as the Peter Schiffs have predicted? Why no inflation despite federal deficit spending and central bank zero interest rates?

    Good questions. I have another one: why is gasoline cheaper–by over half–than it was eight years ago?

    Atlanta is BOOMING with construction. Labor force participation is declining. And I see more high-end luxury cars in a year than I remember seeing my entire life previous. Strange days.

    • Replies: @rod1963
    Gasoline is cheaper because OPEC - KSA has flooded the market with oil to drive out of business the American frackers and Venezuela.

    Beyond that, we're in another massive speculative asset bubble like we were in 2007. IOW lots of fake wealth thanks to a easing of credit. These bubbles are also very dangerous because people are leveraged to the hilt. In the last bubble pop, I knew guys who were playing house flipper being stuck with two dozen homes they couldn't sell. It wiped them out.

    What was worse, the last one was barely contained otherwise we'd have seen a collapse of the banking and stock market.

    When this one blows it will be global.
    , @Flip
    I see Range Rovers all over the near north side of Chicago. I keep wondering where people are getting the money.
    , @Pomegranate
    There has been a ton of new breakthroughs in the petroleum industry in the last 10 years. The price of 3d seismic has gone to the floor which makes drilling targeting extremely accurate. There is horizontal drilling which radically improves the production of wells, and then there's the more famous development of the ability to extract from unconventionals like shell.

    Those developments scared our good friends in the house of saud so now they are drilling the ghawar like crazy to try to force American drillers into bankruptcy since they can produce considerably cheaper then most domestic drillers. So it's a combination of a price war for market share in a genuine technological revolution and drilling and exploration in the last decade.

    And of course our taxpayer funded public universities bring in as many Saudi and international students as they can just to make sure that we don't maintain this technological advantage for long because that would not be fair would it?

    , @dearieme
    "Strange days." Spot on. Could it be the End Times? No. But it might soon be the bloody awful times.
  48. ““I knew I had opened myself to the charge that I had either betrayed my own principles or concealed my real intentions.”

    Not really, given that Nixon’s only real principle was to win re-election.

    I’m always amazed at how politicians do these sorts of things. I was young at the time, so I don’t know how it went down. Did anyone raise objections to the Nixon administration at the time – not objections based on the efficacy of the policy, but on it’s legality? I don’t believe it is legal for the President to just decree that wages and prices can be frozen – not by a long shot. Just as it is not legal for the Obama administration to “close a loophole” in the law concerning the sale of firearms (by the way – a “loophole in the law” is properly known as “the law”), or to not deport illegal aliens, or declare CO2 to be a pollutant.

    The executive branch needs to be ruthlessly stomped on by Congress every single day to keep it in line. Every cabinet secretary needs to be hauled in and grilled by Congress on a weekly basis. The President – every President – should be in a state of impeachment all the time. In order to keep the Executive in line, Congress should be willing to use the power of the purse even to the extent of defunding the domestic budget of the White House – no fancy chefs, no staff, no honor guard, no helicopters – hell, no electricity. The First Family can make its own beds and dine on PBJ sandwiches by candlelight, and the President can drive himself around in his own minivan if he will not obey the law.

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    The executive branch needs to be ruthlessly stomped on by Congress every single day to keep it in line. Every cabinet secretary needs to be hauled in and grilled by Congress on a weekly basis. The President – every President – should be in a state of impeachment all the time. In order to keep the Executive in line, Congress should be willing to use the power of the purse
     
    You'd need an honest Congress to make that work. Where on earth are you going to get an honest Congress from?
  49. @Luke Lea

    So really Merkel, whether intentionally or not, is doing the West a favor by bringing this whole third-world mass immigration issue to a head?
     
    She should be burned at the stake and then sainted in retrospect.

    it is possible Merkel’s boner will help Trump defeat Clinton.

    The problems caused by the influx of muslim migrants into Europe should convince Americans to fight against allowing massive muslim immigration into America. A smart politician like Trump will know how to use the raping of European women by the invading muslims to his advantage.

    unfortunately it is too late for Germany, but watching their nation self-destruct may convince politicians in other nations to restrict immigration.

  50. @Anonymous
    In the UK, 'Bonanza' was relegated to a graveyard Sunday afternoon TV slot on BBC1, when it was assumed most of the viewership was either asleep, pursuing hobbies, doing homework or eating Sunday lunch.

    Bonanza ratings during the period in question:

    Season Twelve…1970-1971
    Number #9 in the ratings, just
    inside the top ten, as this was
    Bonanza’s last consecutive season,
    after David Canary’s departure.

    Season Thirteen…1971-1972
    Number #20 in the ratings, well
    out of the top ten category, as
    the stories were losing their power
    and production was falling behind
    at times. The lowest ratings number
    since 1960.

    Season Fourteen…1972-1973
    In it’s first month in September, in
    the Top 15, and then by October,
    out of the Top 25, and after the
    October 31st broadcast into the first
    week of November, had sunk to #52
    and was cancelled by NBC Television,
    a few days later on November 3rd.

    http://ponderosascenery.homestead.com/ratings.html

  51. @The Anti-Gnostic
    Good questions. I have another one: why is gasoline cheaper--by over half--than it was eight years ago?

    Atlanta is BOOMING with construction. Labor force participation is declining. And I see more high-end luxury cars in a year than I remember seeing my entire life previous. Strange days.

    Gasoline is cheaper because OPEC – KSA has flooded the market with oil to drive out of business the American frackers and Venezuela.

    Beyond that, we’re in another massive speculative asset bubble like we were in 2007. IOW lots of fake wealth thanks to a easing of credit. These bubbles are also very dangerous because people are leveraged to the hilt. In the last bubble pop, I knew guys who were playing house flipper being stuck with two dozen homes they couldn’t sell. It wiped them out.

    What was worse, the last one was barely contained otherwise we’d have seen a collapse of the banking and stock market.

    When this one blows it will be global.

  52. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “Nixon took some comfort from a side benefit that George Shultz, at the time head of the Office of Management and Budget, identified. “At least,” Shultz told the president, “we have now convinced everyone else of the rightness of our original position that wage-price controls are not the answer.”

    George Schultz has been around for a long time.

  53. @Gato de la Biblioteca
    Besides other reasons mentioned, it was also because he was a physically & stylistically unattractive man. The left loves their heroes to be attractive & stylish, thus the never ending love affair with JFK. It would also help with the left if Nixon had been born rich. The left loves poverty in the abstract, but not in person.

    Nixon actually wasn’t that bad looking a guy. Honestly until he started getting old he was actually pretty attractive for a politician in that era. He was certainly better looking than Lyndon Johnson. To my mind the “ugliness” of Nixon was attributed based on the lefts hatred for him not the other way around. Because Nixon was the locus for their hatred of course he was ugly in their minds.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Celebrated British cartoonist Gerald Scarfe founded his career by caricaturing Nixon.

    He had a standard 'pro forma' Nixon which evolved through the years. If you can imagine it, he emphasised the dark widow's peak, the deep set eyes, the retrousse nose narrowing around the facial mid section, to be bifurcated by an overwhelming black stubbly jowl.

    As the years progressed the mid section narrowed and narrowed and narrowed. Towards the end, Scarfe portrayed Nixon with the top of his face being separated from the jowls by a mere vestigial string.

    Stylization taken to the extreme.
  54. @Anonymous
    In the UK, 'Bonanza' was relegated to a graveyard Sunday afternoon TV slot on BBC1, when it was assumed most of the viewership was either asleep, pursuing hobbies, doing homework or eating Sunday lunch.

    Should be borne in mind that “Are You Being Served?” made its debut in 1972….and stayed in production until 1985….

    Not exactly a high-water mark for Anglo humor…

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    What...?

    It was hilarious.

    If you want to see 1970s British comedy at its best, then I recommend the 'On the Buses' movie.
    I strongly doubt that it has ever been shown in America.
  55. @Busby
    People forget how big an issue busing was in the late 60s early 70s. Americans in big cities would put up with a lot of government imposed crap, but neighborhood schools were a part of the national secular faith. Suddenly federal judges were telling you your seven year old son had to take a 45 minute bus ride to school instead of walking three blocks. Because punishing you was the only way to redress 200 years of racism. Smart Power.

    It didn’t help that adding black students to the classroom only lowered the likelihood of learning occurring. Parents understood this. Word got around and not all teachers of that era were Lefty loons, at least not in the South. I was bused and my mom told me years later she couldn’t believe the stories I’d bring back from school. Parents compared notes and discovered they were all hearing the same remarkable stories (black students who couldn’t read, wouldn’t pay attention, etc.). This was an era when discipline was strictly imposed on white children by their parents and expected out of the school system (we had to close the education gap with the Soviets after all). It is also a big reason people fled to the suburbs and explains the creation of new cities (and thus school districts) in the suburban south as well as the growth in private schools.

    • Replies: @Former Darfur
    When blacks were educated by other blacks, there were several advantages. They did not try to educate students above their capacity, and they were usually somewhat motivated to educate the kids who could and wanted to be educated as well as they could. The black teachers were part of the black community because for them there was no other community: unlike "the talented tenth" today, they were not honorary whites isolated from the black underclass. And it's a fair assumption that rambunctious but somewhat educable black males would get an ass whipping on occasion which kept them in some semblance of order.Ineducables were kicked out or put in a 'tard corral' somewhere.

    Hiring black retired drill sergeants to discipline inner city schools is a damn good idea, BTW.
  56. @Jean Cocteausten
    Nixon said he would get us out of Vietnam, but then he invaded Cambodia. The left didn't care about anything else in those days. They'd have voted for George Wallace if he'd run on an anti war platform.

    I don’t really buy this. Opposition to the war on college campuses basically collapsed when Nixon rescinded the draft.

    I would actually argue that when Nixon was president he actually wasn’t that hated by the left. The old left/ red diaper baby hatred of Nixon for nailing Hiss had subsided by 68 and the New Left/ Boomer nostlagic hatred for Nixon hadn’t yet crystallized. If Nixon hadn’t angered Martha Grahmn by denying her FCC licenses he probally would have skated on Watergate.

    That said the landslide election in 72 terrified the left so that probally reignited Nixon hatred on the left, but during his first term at least Nixon was hated by the left only as much as any Republican would have been hated.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    A lot of the visceral hatred of Nixon is, I think, due to life-style liberalism: Baby-boomers who fondly remember voting for McGovern as some kind of liberating act of generational revolution, and who will forever associate Nixon with their crass, middle-class, depression-era parents. It was and is a form of status-signalling.

    Mind you, there are perfectly good reasons for despising Richard Nixon too, if you are a rightist.
    , @Curle
    The Left fully grasped and intuited that Nixon represented an alien culture:

    “Pauline Kael famously commented, after the 1972 Presidential election, ‘I live in a rather special world. I only know one person who voted for Nixon. Where they are I don’t know. They’re outside my ken. But sometimes when I’m in a theater I can feel them.'”

    Nixon warred against activist courts as a way of warring against liberal policy, much of which was being developed through the court. Abortion, busing, criminal procedural 'reform', etc. Nixon vocalized a desire to stop it. I believe the Left hated Nixon.
    , @PV van der Byl
    Martha Graham? Might you have meant Katherine Graham?
    , @Anonymous
    The draft didn't end until the end of 1972 so by then it was too late for Nixon to be anything but the devil to the left. Anyway, they hated him since he ran against Kennedy. They couldn't stand Goldwater either.
    , @5371
    You've never actually read anything written under Nixon, evidently.
  57. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Sam Haysom
    Nixon actually wasn't that bad looking a guy. Honestly until he started getting old he was actually pretty attractive for a politician in that era. He was certainly better looking than Lyndon Johnson. To my mind the "ugliness" of Nixon was attributed based on the lefts hatred for him not the other way around. Because Nixon was the locus for their hatred of course he was ugly in their minds.

    Celebrated British cartoonist Gerald Scarfe founded his career by caricaturing Nixon.

    He had a standard ‘pro forma’ Nixon which evolved through the years. If you can imagine it, he emphasised the dark widow’s peak, the deep set eyes, the retrousse nose narrowing around the facial mid section, to be bifurcated by an overwhelming black stubbly jowl.

    As the years progressed the mid section narrowed and narrowed and narrowed. Towards the end, Scarfe portrayed Nixon with the top of his face being separated from the jowls by a mere vestigial string.

    Stylization taken to the extreme.

  58. Steve, if you ponder the phrase ‘peak Gorbachev’, then you’ll get some idea of the irrationality and madness behind the current Merkel boner.

  59. @advancedatheist

    the alleged boogeyman of deflation, it is helpful to most but dangerous to governments and bankers.

     

    How so? Deflation transfers wealth from borrowers to lenders, namely, bankers, because the borrowers have to come up with money that increases in value over time to pay their loans.

    Not really since it makes it harder for banks to collect on their loans and they owe their depositors as well. I think banks do best with mild inflation.

  60. @The Anti-Gnostic
    Good questions. I have another one: why is gasoline cheaper--by over half--than it was eight years ago?

    Atlanta is BOOMING with construction. Labor force participation is declining. And I see more high-end luxury cars in a year than I remember seeing my entire life previous. Strange days.

    I see Range Rovers all over the near north side of Chicago. I keep wondering where people are getting the money.

  61. @bomag
    Well, gold is commodity not unlike many others.

    We could run a modern economy by pricing things off one single commodity; but modern bookkeeping allows us to base our currency off a basket of commodities; generally a far better thing than using just one commodity.

    Have to disagree with the ‘basket of commodities’, gold is a tried and true money for centuries. Many government gold standards have been frauds, thus giving the true thing a black eye.

  62. @advancedatheist

    the alleged boogeyman of deflation, it is helpful to most but dangerous to governments and bankers.

     

    How so? Deflation transfers wealth from borrowers to lenders, namely, bankers, because the borrowers have to come up with money that increases in value over time to pay their loans.

    Government loves inflation because they can make promises paid for through the indirect taxation that is inflation.

    Defining deflation as ‘debt destruction’ allows a bank to repo collateral, they end up with a hard asset that they paid for through a fractional reserve loan, essentially a book keeping entry. The Fed owns trillions in MBS, they conjured the money to pay for them, but they now own the underlying asset.

  63. Shouldn’t the headline read “Merkels boner vs Nixons wager”?

  64. @Anonymous
    In the UK, 'Bonanza' was relegated to a graveyard Sunday afternoon TV slot on BBC1, when it was assumed most of the viewership was either asleep, pursuing hobbies, doing homework or eating Sunday lunch.

    That may be because the scripts in Bonanza had some severe technical problems, eloquently described here:

    It was every bit as daft as The High Chaparral, which is saying quite a lot.

    As for wage/price controls, they were tried in 1960s Britain by the Labour government and were, like pretty much all their policies, spectacularly ineffectual.

    • Replies: @fnn
    OTOH, Gunsmoke had Miss Kitty running a bordello right from the first episode.
  65. Shock video: “Migrants” firing their guns on New Year’s Eve in Berlin.

    http://www.infowars.com/shock-video-shows-migrants-in-berlin-shooting-guns-throwing-fireworks/

    • Replies: @Dirk Dagger
    [dis-] Infowars is always fun, I like how the stories are scrubbed of content so as to be unverifiable. ¡Olé!
  66. As with most government intervention, price controls aren’t about controlling prices and are all about making the government look like it’s doing something. It’s a political maneuver, not actually designed to help, but to look like it’s helping. When it lasts long enough to judge its effects, however, it is shown to be folly.

    That’s why FDR’s New Deal policies—which were really Hoover’s, but let’s simplify for now—were met with much enthusiasm at first: the government is doing something! Had it not been for WW2 burnishing his image (and a lot of lefty propaganda), however, FDR’s policies would have looked like failures in retrospect. There is much to the idea that FDR wanted us involved in WW2 to save his legacy, since his administration to 1941 hadn’t resolved anything about the Depression.

    • Replies: @Brutusale
    I remember reading Robert McNamara's statement to one of the generals developing plans for Vietnam: "General, you don't have a war plan! All you have is a kind of horrible spasm!" and I thought, wow, that's true of pretty much everything government does.
  67. @Steve Sailer
    Funny thing is that Nixon was employed to regulate tire prices during WWII from which he developed a distaste for price controls.

    Steve, on the intersection of immigration and price controls, have you read this post (see comments, too) by Nick Rowe?

    http://worthwhile.typepad.com/worthwhile_canadian_initi/2015/10/countries-as-clubs-open-borders-and-debtgdp-ratios.html

    His posts on immigration are quite good. He reads Cochran, Razib, and others – probably you, too.

    In general, I think the HBD neck of the woods tends to suffer from bad macroeconomics (Pseudoerasmus is a notable counterexample), so I love it whenever the econ blogosphere productively crosses streams with the realist blogosphere.

  68. @The Anti-Gnostic
    Good questions. I have another one: why is gasoline cheaper--by over half--than it was eight years ago?

    Atlanta is BOOMING with construction. Labor force participation is declining. And I see more high-end luxury cars in a year than I remember seeing my entire life previous. Strange days.

    There has been a ton of new breakthroughs in the petroleum industry in the last 10 years. The price of 3d seismic has gone to the floor which makes drilling targeting extremely accurate. There is horizontal drilling which radically improves the production of wells, and then there’s the more famous development of the ability to extract from unconventionals like shell.

    Those developments scared our good friends in the house of saud so now they are drilling the ghawar like crazy to try to force American drillers into bankruptcy since they can produce considerably cheaper then most domestic drillers. So it’s a combination of a price war for market share in a genuine technological revolution and drilling and exploration in the last decade.

    And of course our taxpayer funded public universities bring in as many Saudi and international students as they can just to make sure that we don’t maintain this technological advantage for long because that would not be fair would it?

  69. @Sam Haysom
    I don't really buy this. Opposition to the war on college campuses basically collapsed when Nixon rescinded the draft.

    I would actually argue that when Nixon was president he actually wasn't that hated by the left. The old left/ red diaper baby hatred of Nixon for nailing Hiss had subsided by 68 and the New Left/ Boomer nostlagic hatred for Nixon hadn't yet crystallized. If Nixon hadn't angered Martha Grahmn by denying her FCC licenses he probally would have skated on Watergate.

    That said the landslide election in 72 terrified the left so that probally reignited Nixon hatred on the left, but during his first term at least Nixon was hated by the left only as much as any Republican would have been hated.

    A lot of the visceral hatred of Nixon is, I think, due to life-style liberalism: Baby-boomers who fondly remember voting for McGovern as some kind of liberating act of generational revolution, and who will forever associate Nixon with their crass, middle-class, depression-era parents. It was and is a form of status-signalling.

    Mind you, there are perfectly good reasons for despising Richard Nixon too, if you are a rightist.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Baby-boomers who fondly remember voting for McGovern…
     
    Nixon likely carried the vote of those born 1946-54, along with everyone else, though I'm willing to look at evidence to the contrary. Squares outnumbered the cool even in 1972. The Silent Majority were still being born after 1945.

    their crass, middle-class, depression-era parents…
     
    …who just eight years earlier gave a landslide to LBJ, the very personification of "crass". The champion of the "middle crass"!

    "Boomers" went for Goldwater that year, albeit in the only state any of them were allowed to vote.
  70. You must keep in mind that the unemployment rate is a lagging indicator in both directions. It lags the economy when the economy is coming out of a recession, and it lags the economy when the economy is starting to go into a recession. At present, there are many astute economists who are predicting the economy is going to go into a recession if it hasn’t already started doing so. Thanks to Ben Bernanke and the Fed, the U.S. economy has been in a bubble inflated by incredibly low interest rates for the last seven years. Such a policy might have been justified for a year or two by the severe economic downturn we suffered in 2008-09, but the Fed, imo, should have begun reversing course 5 or 6 years ago and restoring interest rates back to a more normal level. I know that a lot of seniors who were counting on their savings to get them through life after they retired would be grateful. It’s kind of hard to live off your interest when the banks are only paying 0.25% on your savings.

    BTW, before anyone responds about how dire the situation was during the “Great Recession” and how the heroic actions of Barack Hussein Obama “saved us” from another Great Depression, let me point out that the length of the 2007-09 recession was roughly 18 months (as measured by the NBER, the official arbiter of business cycles, while the average length of all recessions since the end of WWII has been–surprise!!!–17.5 months:

    ” He [Obama] bragged about the fact that the economy started growing again just six months after he became President. This claim is attributable to the fact that the 2007-09 recession was judged to have ended in June 2009, according to the nonpartisan NBER, the official arbiter of business cycles. (Not announced by NBER until September 20, 2010.) Since the recession was deemed to have started in December 2007, that made the recession 18 months long. By comparision, the U.S. has had 33 business cycles since 1854, and the average 1ength of those 33 recessions was 17.5 months. http://www.nber.org/cycles/cyclesmain.html So the Great Recession which Obama and his idolators like to credit him with ending was just [0.5–correction to typo] months longer than the average length of the last 33 recessions.” http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/romney-didnt-renounce-the-iraq-war/comment-page-1/#comment-563803 [from an October 2012 message I posted on TAC]

  71. @Flip
    I never quite understood why the leftist press and the SWPL hated Nixon so much. He was pretty leftist in how he ran things what with the EPA and affirmative action. Did they hold his earlier Red baiting against him?

    He won the Vietnam War, forcing the democrat dominated Congress to defund military aid to ARVN after the Easter Offensive. This more than anything else shifted the military and especially officers permanently away from the Democratic Party. To a classicist, ensuring the absolute loyalty of the officer class to your political party is a major coup. I’m sure Nixon and some of the smarter dems realized that, but public reeducation has essentially buried that historical event.

  72. @Sam Haysom
    I don't really buy this. Opposition to the war on college campuses basically collapsed when Nixon rescinded the draft.

    I would actually argue that when Nixon was president he actually wasn't that hated by the left. The old left/ red diaper baby hatred of Nixon for nailing Hiss had subsided by 68 and the New Left/ Boomer nostlagic hatred for Nixon hadn't yet crystallized. If Nixon hadn't angered Martha Grahmn by denying her FCC licenses he probally would have skated on Watergate.

    That said the landslide election in 72 terrified the left so that probally reignited Nixon hatred on the left, but during his first term at least Nixon was hated by the left only as much as any Republican would have been hated.

    The Left fully grasped and intuited that Nixon represented an alien culture:

    “Pauline Kael famously commented, after the 1972 Presidential election, ‘I live in a rather special world. I only know one person who voted for Nixon. Where they are I don’t know. They’re outside my ken. But sometimes when I’m in a theater I can feel them.’”

    Nixon warred against activist courts as a way of warring against liberal policy, much of which was being developed through the court. Abortion, busing, criminal procedural ‘reform’, etc. Nixon vocalized a desire to stop it. I believe the Left hated Nixon.

  73. @SFG
    Yes and no. 'It's all money' tends to be a mistake of the Left, as opposed to the Right which tends to see tribal motivations where money is involved. Of course, people do things for a variety of reasons. It's similar to the Sailerian argument that human outcomes are nature and nurture versus the MSM view that it's all nurture.

    I'm not Merkel (or I would have closed the borders to Muslims claiming the threat of a wave of anti-Semitism ;) ), but seems to me there is some component of the old desire to 'do good by doing well', to satisfy selfish and selfless motives at once. The idea is that by accepting foreign immigrants from a disparate culture, Germany can cleanse itself of the stain of its Nazi past, as well as gain enough young workers to support its aging population. The problems are obvious--rape gangs in Cologne--but there you have it.

    Comments from people who actually live or work in Germany welcome.

    I’d agree it’s probably a bit of both. If the powers that be in Germany only wanted cheap labour they could bring in more docile Christian and Buddhist workers from South East Asia or Latin America, or smarter workers from China and India.

    However, while that would satisfy the economists on the liberal right, it wouldn’t satisfy the liberal left who are more interested in helping refugees and creating job opportunities for government workers.

  74. Off-topic,

    The Lumpengentsia continue to process THE HATEFUL EIGHT:

    I think Quentin Tarantino has had an awakening in the last few years. The original draft of The Hateful Eight, the one that leaked online before production, didn’t include the Lincoln Letter reveal. The Lincoln Letter was real in that version. But in the years since that leak, in the years that Tarantino worked on the script and the movie, the situation in the US changed around him. That draft leaked in April of 2014; in August Michael Brown lay dead in a street in Ferguson. In November the movie, which Tarantino threatened to shelve, came back to life as casting started. At some point between April and November he had reworked the Lincoln Letter, and I don’t believe it’s a coincidence that the protests in Ferguson happened right in the middle of that time span.

    http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2016/01/08/the-hateful-eights-lincoln-letter-and-the-lies-of-django-unchained

    • Replies: @Curle
    That all the motivations driving the actions of those who preceded us can now be attributed to 'hate' by people who expect to be taken seriously for their thoughts and writing shows how degraded our 'public intellectuals' or lumpenintelligencia have become. Reconstruction we learn was about 'hate.' I'm sure that would have come as a surprise to all those who watched an entire region's economy collapse to the point that it became a public health crises, those dying prematurely from starvation and disease numbering around one million or more. But, I'm sure people were too distracted by racial 'hate' to take notice or dwell on the causes (all predicted by southern politicians before the war BTW).
  75. Just wanted to mention that a mess of Merkel errors should be called a boner-kebab (the official street food of Germany).

  76. @Steve Richter
    I understand less about the economy than ever before. The Fed is loaning money at zero %? Who is borrowing it? And why do they not borrow more and speculate with it? If import tariffs are bad why does the Chinese economy do so well? Why has the price of gold not continued to increase as the Peter Schiffs have predicted? Why no inflation despite federal deficit spending and central bank zero interest rates?

    I’ll try to answer these:

    “Who is borrowing it?” – other banks and probably other countries.

    “And why do they not borrow more and speculate with it?” – the sub prime bubble was probably that. They’ve been caught with toxic assets enough to know there is no sympathy for them.

    “If import tariffs are bad why does the Chinese economy do so well?” – import tariffs must not be so bad.

    “Why has the price of gold not continued to increase as the Peter Schiffs have predicted?” – gold hit 1800 an ounce, but it fell because deflationary forces are catching up to the inflationary ones. the reality is that people do sell commodities if their value gets too high, as the Hunt brothers discovered with silver.

    “Why no inflation despite federal deficit spending and central bank zero interest rates?” – deflation on one hand, not counting “volatile” food and energy on the other. lastly our trade deficits are sucking hundreds of billions of dollars out of the country every year, and as near as can be determined the foreigners are content to sit on all of it. if the money ever came back to the US, you’d see quite a bit of inflation however.

  77. @Steve Richter
    I understand less about the economy than ever before. The Fed is loaning money at zero %? Who is borrowing it? And why do they not borrow more and speculate with it? If import tariffs are bad why does the Chinese economy do so well? Why has the price of gold not continued to increase as the Peter Schiffs have predicted? Why no inflation despite federal deficit spending and central bank zero interest rates?

    I’m not claiming that this is “the” answer, but it may be part of why such a massive increase in the money supply by the fed hasn’t resulted in inflation.

    The Money Multiplier

    Yes, the fed flooded the banking system with money (important note: dollars are a form of credit) but commercial banks haven’t been lending that money out at a particularly quick rate. Basically, the banks are – and have been – hoarding the cash flooded into the system by the fed.

    When a dollar is introduced into the banking system, it is deposited at a bank, which then lends it out to someone. That someone spends the money on something, which results in another person getting that dollar. That person then either saves the dollar (thus putting it into a bank to be lent again) or spends it on something and thus passing it along to someone else. This is how money multiplies and grows – the Money Multiplier.

    The fed throwing money into the system creates the liquidity to get the process started. However, if the banks hoard most of the money (and consumers quickly save their money rather than spending it out of fear), the money isn’t multiplying itself at the same rate as in the past. The Velocity of Money (the speed at which money is multiplied or moves through the system) goes way down.

    Think of the money supply as firewood. You can have all the wood that you want, but without a match (or in a slow economy a smoldering fire in a light rain), you won’t get much or any fire. However, if you have a ton of wood on the fire, you certainly have the potential for a seriously big fire.

    The Money Multiplier for the M2 monetary base was around eight before the financial crisis. It dropped to four after 2009 and continues to trickle down; it’s around three right now.

    There’s a lot of money in the system, but it’s not moving around much.

    Another way to look at the situation (possibly even another argument) is to understand that a dollar is just another form of credit. It’s a loan. Look at a dollar bill. At the top, it says Federal Reserve Note. Now, think back to 2008-2009. Banks dramatically cut back lending and consumers dramatically cut back borrowing. In essence, the amount of credit in the system was collapsing. The fed jumped in and replaced that credit with dollars (another form of credit). Because the amount of money supply (credit) increase matched the amount of credit destroyed by banks and consumers, the system stayed in balance and thus there was no inflation.

    Danger Will Robinson

    So what’s the danger? The danger is that the fed won’t be able to reduce the money supply fast enough if the money multiplier starts to increase or short-term interest rates start rising.

    To a degree, it’s a question of the the utility of goods vs the utility of money. It’s seems pretty balanced at the moment, but that could change.

    Regardless, it seems to me that while probably necessary during and immediately after the financial crisis, the fed’s continued flooding of the system with money over the past couple of years has unnecessarily put the country in danger of inflation. The fed should move quicker to reduce its massive balance sheet.

    But, again, this is all just guesswork. Could be right, could be wrong, probably a bit of both.

    • Replies: @Steve Richter

    However, if the banks hoard most of the money (and consumers quickly save their money rather than spending it out of fear), the money isn’t multiplying itself at the same rate as in the past.
     
    yeah, I get this. The banks are required to keep a lot more reserves. So they borrow from the Fed to increase their reserves. But they take that borrowed money and use it to buy T-Bills, right? Which gives cash to the government to fund the deficit spending. Which is spending that goes directly in the pockets of American citizens. Which should increase inflation. But there is no sign of inflation.
  78. @Flip
    I never quite understood why the leftist press and the SWPL hated Nixon so much. He was pretty leftist in how he ran things what with the EPA and affirmative action. Did they hold his earlier Red baiting against him?

    Nixon was also favorable to civil rights legislation in the 50s, while LBJ was adamantly opposed to civil rights as a leading Senator.

  79. More on Tarantino’s views on gun violence in the USA:

    “The only time black folks are safe is when white folks are disarmed,”

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    It's a pity Tarantino's brain isn't as big as his chin.
  80. @Sam Haysom
    I don't really buy this. Opposition to the war on college campuses basically collapsed when Nixon rescinded the draft.

    I would actually argue that when Nixon was president he actually wasn't that hated by the left. The old left/ red diaper baby hatred of Nixon for nailing Hiss had subsided by 68 and the New Left/ Boomer nostlagic hatred for Nixon hadn't yet crystallized. If Nixon hadn't angered Martha Grahmn by denying her FCC licenses he probally would have skated on Watergate.

    That said the landslide election in 72 terrified the left so that probally reignited Nixon hatred on the left, but during his first term at least Nixon was hated by the left only as much as any Republican would have been hated.

    Martha Graham? Might you have meant Katherine Graham?

    • Replies: @Sam Haysom
    Yes thank you for correcting me I should have double checked.
  81. @Steve Richter
    I understand less about the economy than ever before. The Fed is loaning money at zero %? Who is borrowing it? And why do they not borrow more and speculate with it? If import tariffs are bad why does the Chinese economy do so well? Why has the price of gold not continued to increase as the Peter Schiffs have predicted? Why no inflation despite federal deficit spending and central bank zero interest rates?

    Btw, the huge increase in the money supply also helps explain some of the increase in the U.S. stock market. (Not all by any means. It’s a very complex machine.)

    It’s not that money flooded into the stock market. That’s ridiculous. There’s no such thing as money on the sidelines. However, by purchasing long-term bonds with QE, the fed drove down short- and, likely somewhat, long-term bond rates.

    To be in the stock market, investors generally demand a certain premium over bonds. Now, how much of a premium can change, but all things being equal, if you drive down interest rates on bonds, you drive down how much has to be earned by investors to be in the stock market. The way that you drive down long-term rates of return on an assets is to drive up its current price. That’s what happened in the stock market: A one-time pop in value which will lead to lower returns in the future.

    The same thing happened with intermediate and long-term bonds.

    Now, that was great for people – like me – who own stocks and long-term bonds. However, what it means going forward is much lower annual returns for the next decade or so – for both U.S. stocks and bonds.

    My point is that everyone should be prepared for low returns in their portfolios for the seven to ten years. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.

    You likely could mitigate those lower returns by owning international stocks. Larry Swedroe just had a nice couple of articles at ETF.com about the expected low rates of return and what you can do to lessen the pain a bit – though, in the end, we’re all in for lower returns.

    Don’t trust some guru. Timing/beating the market is basically impossible. Just get as diversified as possible at the lowest cost possible.

    Good luck.

  82. Totally OT, can’t remember if I posted this before – UK-based Nigerian lonely-heart scammers use Neil Strauss’s The Game and a book of (presumably girly) poetry by one Douglas Pagels to con a woman out of £1.6 million.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/12089436/Match.com-fraudsters-used-seduction-manual-to-con-woman-out-of-1.6m.html

    The touch I like is that the hunky engineer they invented was “Christian Anderson” – a fairytale lover!

  83. The “All In the Family” clip in question. “Who’s that guy? Dan Rather, he’s going to tell everybody what Mr.
    Nixon just said.”

  84. And from Nixon himself.

  85. there was virtually no discussion of what would happen after the initial 90-day freeze or how the new system would be terminated.

    In retrospect, for real wages it never was.

  86. @SFG
    Yes and no. 'It's all money' tends to be a mistake of the Left, as opposed to the Right which tends to see tribal motivations where money is involved. Of course, people do things for a variety of reasons. It's similar to the Sailerian argument that human outcomes are nature and nurture versus the MSM view that it's all nurture.

    I'm not Merkel (or I would have closed the borders to Muslims claiming the threat of a wave of anti-Semitism ;) ), but seems to me there is some component of the old desire to 'do good by doing well', to satisfy selfish and selfless motives at once. The idea is that by accepting foreign immigrants from a disparate culture, Germany can cleanse itself of the stain of its Nazi past, as well as gain enough young workers to support its aging population. The problems are obvious--rape gangs in Cologne--but there you have it.

    Comments from people who actually live or work in Germany welcome.

    If the Germans bring in a million+ horny Muslim males 20-35 years of age (sans women), who on earth is going to sexually service them? A few furtive holiday gang groping are the least of their problems going forward.

    If they really want to solve the problem of public fondling and rape with (what used to be) typical hard-headed German efficiency and rationality, they need to establish a federal Comfort Woman Corps and set up “Comfort Stations” across the country.

    • Replies: @wren
    A few furtive holiday gang groping are the least of their problems going forward.

    You got that right. When we consider future "family reunification," continued migration and MENA immigrant fertility rates compared to German ones, ethnic Germans may be a minority in Germany within a few generations.

    , @Anonymous
    Actually, prostitution in Germany is fully legal and fully tolerated.

    So-called 'Eros Centers' - really gigantic hypermarket style brothels - typical Teutonic efficiency more - are found on the outskirts if every major German population center.

    A fact that is not generally advertised as it doesn't fit the lefty 'exploitation' narrative.
  87. @Sam Haysom
    I don't really buy this. Opposition to the war on college campuses basically collapsed when Nixon rescinded the draft.

    I would actually argue that when Nixon was president he actually wasn't that hated by the left. The old left/ red diaper baby hatred of Nixon for nailing Hiss had subsided by 68 and the New Left/ Boomer nostlagic hatred for Nixon hadn't yet crystallized. If Nixon hadn't angered Martha Grahmn by denying her FCC licenses he probally would have skated on Watergate.

    That said the landslide election in 72 terrified the left so that probally reignited Nixon hatred on the left, but during his first term at least Nixon was hated by the left only as much as any Republican would have been hated.

    The draft didn’t end until the end of 1972 so by then it was too late for Nixon to be anything but the devil to the left. Anyway, they hated him since he ran against Kennedy. They couldn’t stand Goldwater either.

    • Replies: @yaqub the mad scientist
    "hey hated him since he ran against Kennedy. "

    The Kennedy cult is truly something. It's the real beginning of politics-as-phantasm. The left mindlessly idolizes him when LBJ was the high water mark of liberalism. Southerner hate, I guess.

  88. OT: The LAT says today that Asian and European DNA is very different from African DNA.

    http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-neanderthal-genes-immunity-20160106-story.html

    Because they love science, as the journalist notes.

  89. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Off topic:

    The Netflix documentary Making a Murderer has been getting a lot buzz. It’s about a fairly dumb family in Wisconsin getting railroaded by law enforcement, and has many HBD implications. If it were set in Detroit, with a black family, it would be about social justice. But it does show how the world is a dizzying and complicated place for those who are not too bright, and I’m reminded of Steve’s excellent Vdare articles on how to help those on left side of the bell curve — such as limiting low-skilled immigration.

    Two people in the show don’t know the meaning of the word “inconsistent.” Sailer writes, unlike the military, “lawyers, regulators, consultants, academics, and others who profit from abstruseness increasingly dominate the rest of America.”

    Perhaps the Blacks Lives Matter movement is not so much about the disproven violence against blacks, but a ginned up frustration at complexity and being outsmarted. The same could be said for alleged micro-aggressions, as Sailer has suggested.

    http://www.vdare.com/articles/america-and-the-left-hand-side-of-the-bell-curve

  90. @Big Bill
    If the Germans bring in a million+ horny Muslim males 20-35 years of age (sans women), who on earth is going to sexually service them? A few furtive holiday gang groping are the least of their problems going forward.

    If they really want to solve the problem of public fondling and rape with (what used to be) typical hard-headed German efficiency and rationality, they need to establish a federal Comfort Woman Corps and set up "Comfort Stations" across the country.

    A few furtive holiday gang groping are the least of their problems going forward.

    You got that right. When we consider future “family reunification,” continued migration and MENA immigrant fertility rates compared to German ones, ethnic Germans may be a minority in Germany within a few generations.

  91. I’ve read Nixon was motivated by the ’58 recession and how that had caused the Republicans to lose 60+ seats in Congress; he wasn’t going to have that happen just in time for his re-election.

    It was on a Sunday night at 7pm east coast time; I was watching it with one of my girl friends mother. Bonanza had been on at that time since ’59. I was 19 and taking a lot of econ course at the Public Ivy.

    Phillips curve was next semester. That worked; until it didn’t. Like in most of the ’70s. That was one tough decade to try and get your first step up on the ladder of success.

    When France and Switzerland would show up at the gold depository in New York with $75 million in paper money and demand it be replaced with gold, at $35 an ounce, it wasn’t going to take all that long to make a real dent in out gold reserves. So off we went.

  92. @Curle
    It didn't help that adding black students to the classroom only lowered the likelihood of learning occurring. Parents understood this. Word got around and not all teachers of that era were Lefty loons, at least not in the South. I was bused and my mom told me years later she couldn't believe the stories I'd bring back from school. Parents compared notes and discovered they were all hearing the same remarkable stories (black students who couldn't read, wouldn't pay attention, etc.). This was an era when discipline was strictly imposed on white children by their parents and expected out of the school system (we had to close the education gap with the Soviets after all). It is also a big reason people fled to the suburbs and explains the creation of new cities (and thus school districts) in the suburban south as well as the growth in private schools.

    When blacks were educated by other blacks, there were several advantages. They did not try to educate students above their capacity, and they were usually somewhat motivated to educate the kids who could and wanted to be educated as well as they could. The black teachers were part of the black community because for them there was no other community: unlike “the talented tenth” today, they were not honorary whites isolated from the black underclass. And it’s a fair assumption that rambunctious but somewhat educable black males would get an ass whipping on occasion which kept them in some semblance of order.Ineducables were kicked out or put in a ‘tard corral’ somewhere.

    Hiring black retired drill sergeants to discipline inner city schools is a damn good idea, BTW.

  93. @Thomas Fuller
    That may be because the scripts in Bonanza had some severe technical problems, eloquently described here:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psoaCxQ6u5w

    It was every bit as daft as The High Chaparral, which is saying quite a lot.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HqBInlTQHaU

    As for wage/price controls, they were tried in 1960s Britain by the Labour government and were, like pretty much all their policies, spectacularly ineffectual.

    OTOH, Gunsmoke had Miss Kitty running a bordello right from the first episode.

  94. @AnotherDad
    I remember thinking "How can you do this? What if a guy's costs go up? He can't raise prices ... he'll be squeezed out of business? Does this mean a guy can't get a raise? What if a guy is doing a good job and deserves a raise?"

    I was barely a teenager, with no economic theory other than "life", but the collision of micro reality--which requires flexibility--against macro policy here was pretty obvious. My parents, who'd been through war time rationing were much more amenable to this sort of nonsense.

    It was a weird time. But ...

    just sort of screwy, nothing like *suicidal insanity* of Merkel and elites deny bleedingly obvious basic biological and cultural realities and screw up the West in a way that can't be fixed short of civil war and genocide.

    It was a weird time. But …

    just sort of screwy, nothing like *suicidal insanity* of Merkel and elites deny bleedingly obvious basic biological and cultural realities and screw up the West in a way that can’t be fixed short of civil war and genocide.

    I have to say I see no parallels either between Nixon’s and Merkel’s actions. If there’s a precedent for Mutti Merkel in the 1970s, it would be someone like this guy.

    • Agree: Travis
  95. @MEH 0910
    I thought that Time cover looked like the work of Jack Davis of MAD Magazine fame. You can make out his signature next to the housewife's leg: http://content.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,19730409,00.html

    What a coincidence. Jack Davis did a Bonanza cover illustration for the August 14-20, 1971 issue of TV Guide:
    http://www.tvguidemagazine.com/archive/suboffer/1970s/1971/19710814_c1.jpg.html

    Richard Nixon then preempted Bonanza Sunday evening August 15th with his speech:
    http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=3115

    • Replies: @anon
    I don't know if anyone else cares or not, but thanks for the link to Jack Davis. He seems to have been mostly from before my time, but I have recently come to the realization that the cartoonists in MAD, who were drawing throwaway panels for ten-year-olds, were some of the best in the business.

    I had sort of an obsession with Spy vs Spy when I was a kid, and recently found a book of all the old comics, and was surprised with how actually good they still are.

    I was impressed with the TIME comic too. Look at the detail on the rancher's hand, for example. And when you first see it, both of the characters look really obnoxious, but when you look up close, they both loom sort of dignified, in a way. You don't really get that anymore.

    And, for some reason, I thought that the rancher looked sort of like drawings of Bob Hope I had seen, even though he didn't really look like him. So it was cool to learn that Jack Davis liked drawing Bob Hope.

    Anyway. That's probably enough discussion of Jack Davis and that comic.

  96. @syonredux
    Off-topic,

    The Lumpengentsia continue to process THE HATEFUL EIGHT:


    I think Quentin Tarantino has had an awakening in the last few years. The original draft of The Hateful Eight, the one that leaked online before production, didn’t include the Lincoln Letter reveal. The Lincoln Letter was real in that version. But in the years since that leak, in the years that Tarantino worked on the script and the movie, the situation in the US changed around him. That draft leaked in April of 2014; in August Michael Brown lay dead in a street in Ferguson. In November the movie, which Tarantino threatened to shelve, came back to life as casting started. At some point between April and November he had reworked the Lincoln Letter, and I don’t believe it’s a coincidence that the protests in Ferguson happened right in the middle of that time span.
     
    http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2016/01/08/the-hateful-eights-lincoln-letter-and-the-lies-of-django-unchained

    That all the motivations driving the actions of those who preceded us can now be attributed to ‘hate’ by people who expect to be taken seriously for their thoughts and writing shows how degraded our ‘public intellectuals’ or lumpenintelligencia have become. Reconstruction we learn was about ‘hate.’ I’m sure that would have come as a surprise to all those who watched an entire region’s economy collapse to the point that it became a public health crises, those dying prematurely from starvation and disease numbering around one million or more. But, I’m sure people were too distracted by racial ‘hate’ to take notice or dwell on the causes (all predicted by southern politicians before the war BTW).

  97. Just a small question, but where in the Constitution does the president get the authority to impose wage and price controls?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    It was the Zeroth Amendment of 1971.
    , @Curle
    "[T]he U.S. Constitution poses no serious threat to our form of government."

    Joe Sobran
    , @tbraton
    "Just a small question, but where in the Constitution does the president get the authority to impose wage and price controls?"

    Nixon was acting pursuant to authority granted to him by Congress. "First, it’s usually Congress that lays the foundation for an imperial presidency with unconstitutional delegations of authority to the executive branch. The Economic Stabilization Act of 1970 gave Nixon legislative cover for his actions.

    The act was “a political dare,” according to top Nixon official George Shultz — the Democrats thought Nixon wouldn’t use the powers they’d granted him, but he called their bluff." http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/remembering-nixons-wage-price-controls

    Whether Congress had such authority must be viewed in light of the then-existing thinking re Congress' authority to regulate Interstate Commerce, which was thought to be virtually all embracing as a result of the Supreme Court decisions made by the FDR appointed Supreme Court. That's why virtually the entire legal establishment thought a few years ago that the issue of the "individual mandate" imposed by Obamacare was a slam dunk and had no chance of being overturned by the Supreme Court. As far as wage and price controls, there was the history of them being imposed during WWII and the Korean War.

    Probably the silliest argument to emerge from the Nixon w-and-p controls fiasco was that "it was necessary to impose them to show they don't work." Well, they certainly worked to get Nixon reelected in a landslide. I guess the same argument can be made in the context of "affirmative action" (initiated under Nixon) and the Iraq War (started by GWB). There is no end of bad policies which just be justified under that mantra.

    For a good review of w-and-p controls generally, see http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Wage_and_Price_Controls.aspx
  98. @Dave M.
    Just a small question, but where in the Constitution does the president get the authority to impose wage and price controls?

    It was the Zeroth Amendment of 1971.

  99. @Steven J.
    Shock video: "Migrants" firing their guns on New Year's Eve in Berlin.

    http://www.infowars.com/shock-video-shows-migrants-in-berlin-shooting-guns-throwing-fireworks/

    [dis-] Infowars is always fun, I like how the stories are scrubbed of content so as to be unverifiable. ¡Olé!

  100. Bonanza was a huge hit because NBC risked shooting & televising it in then-expensive color, when most people’s owned B&W television sets and nearly all other programming was in B&W. Bonanza, and to a lesser extent the earlier Sunday evening telecast of Walt Disney’s Wonderful World of Color hour, spurred a consumer stampede to buy color television sets. Viewers in their millions who weren’t fond of horse operas tuned in to Bonanza on their new color sets – or on their relatives and neighbors or local taverns’ color sets, purely because Bonanza was a color program; and this had the curious side-effect of converting many of those western-antipathetic viewers into loyal Bonanza fans. Its color telecasting even trumped Bonanza’s rather early loss of the very popular Hoss Cartwright character upon Dan Blocker’s death, as Bonanza continued to enjoy massive popularity with just its two remaining brothers. Even Pernell Roberts’s later dismount from the role of Adam Cartwright scarcely budged Bonanza’s excellent ratings.

    On the topic of Mr. Sailer’s post, Nixon’s wage & price controls were a minor fizzle-&-dud that had no long-term effect upon the United States, on Americans, or on the global economy; but Frau Merkel’s and the EU’s encouragement and enabling of Islamic jihad victory by hijra form a first-class self-inflicted needless, easily avoided catastrophe entailing epochal consequences, including the guaranteeing of ensuing waves of even more – and larger – hordes of immigrating Moslems.

    • Replies: @CJ
    Re Bonanza, the Adam Cartwright character disappeared when Pernell Roberts left the series in 1965. Hoss Cartwright kept appearing until Dan Blocker's death in 1972.

    I wasn't a huge fan of Bonanza, and it had its liberal moments, but at least the largely Jewish cast, writers, and producers didn't hate America.
    , @Rob McX
    Motorola lost heavily betting on colour TV too early, i.e. investing in it back in the 50s and 60s before people were willing to buy colour sets in substantial numbers. It seems there's such a thing as hitting on a good idea too soon. The economics writer "Adam Smith" (George Goodman) covers the episode in some detail in one of his books.
    , @sf
    The auto industry, which had been down in 1970, made the most of it. Lee Iacocca said "this is a real sweet deal for buyers of American cars. We're not going to defy the president." Sales were up in 71, 72 and 73, but back down in 74.
  101. For somebody who was by all accounts a terrific poker player (during WW2 while deployed on a Navy ship, in a game of five card stud then-Lieutenant Nixon once stayed in and perfectly played a straight flush), Nixon sure bet wrong on both wage and price controls, then the Watergate coverup.

  102. @Dave M.
    Just a small question, but where in the Constitution does the president get the authority to impose wage and price controls?

    “[T]he U.S. Constitution poses no serious threat to our form of government.”

    Joe Sobran

  103. It wasn’t a completely nutso idea.

    Mainstream economists of the time believed inflation was, in part, driven by expectations formed largely from recent experience — a self-fulfilling prophecy. A wage-price freeze might, therefore, cut the legs out from future inflation.

    In the five years after that, the economics profession went through a revolution in its thinking about how expectations are formed. The new thinking has ever since been known as “rational expectations”. It caught on to the point where a wage-price freeze would be unthinkable today. (Assuming we still had an inflation problem. We don’t of course, but if and when the huge monetary expansion since 2008 comes home to roost, a wage-price freeze is unlikely to be among the seriously considered therapies for it. Well, unless Bernie Sanders happens to be President when it happens.)

  104. @Steve Richter
    I understand less about the economy than ever before. The Fed is loaning money at zero %? Who is borrowing it? And why do they not borrow more and speculate with it? If import tariffs are bad why does the Chinese economy do so well? Why has the price of gold not continued to increase as the Peter Schiffs have predicted? Why no inflation despite federal deficit spending and central bank zero interest rates?

    I understand less about the economy than ever before. The Fed is loaning money at zero %? Who is borrowing it? And why do they not borrow more and speculate with it? If import tariffs are bad why does the Chinese economy do so well? Why has the price of gold not continued to increase as the Peter Schiffs have predicted? Why no inflation despite federal deficit spending and central bank zero interest rates?

    The two bolded statements are closely related.

    Who is “borrowing” the money that the Fed is giving away for free? The Fed’s cousins on Wall Steet.

    Why is there no inflation? There is inflation. It’s called the equities aka stock market. If you or me received free money from the Fed (lol!), we’d go to the supermarket or the BMW dealership and buy more stuff, driving up the price of consumer goods, aka fueling inflation. When the Fed’s cousins on Wall Street get free money from Bernanke or Yellen, they plow it straight into assets, chiefly equities. This is why the market is at an all time high, despite the underlying economy being in the utter dumps, with a labor force participation rate the lowest it’s been since the introduction of the statistic. But when you create trillions of new money, that money has to go somewhere, hence the stock bubble.

    So yeah, the answer is that there is inflation, it’s just in the sorts of things that the Fed’s cousins on Wall Street buy, not the kinds of things that you or me buy. That money the Fed printed never made its way down to wages where we would get a hold of it, it stayed with the usual suspects like Jamie Dimon and Lloyd Blankfein on Wall Street

    • Replies: @Steve Richter

    This is why the market is at an all time high, despite the underlying economy being in the utter dumps, with a labor force participation rate the lowest it’s been since the introduction of the statistic.
     
    but corporate profits are at an all time high. $2 trilion per quarter. http://www.statista.com/statistics/222127/quarterly-corporate-profits-in-the-us/

    and even if stock prices are inflated that is money going into the economy, no? The Fed money was used to buy stocks which put money in the pocket of the seller.
  105. @nglaer
    By making this comparison, you seem to be assuming Merkel made a boner motivated in great part by economics, a desire to remedy Germany's looming labor shortage, and rejuvenate its aging demographics. But what role was a played by desire to wipe out the Nazi strain once and for all, by ending or submerging the "German nation." ? I know that sounds outlandish, except I can't imagine how someone smart enough to run Germany could be so stupid as to believe in the nonsense of motivation #1. Economics is hard, understanding that an influx of uneducated young men from another, lesser , culture won't work is easy. Isn't it?

    Maybe, as some on VDARE have suggested, Merkel was bribed?

  106. @PV van der Byl
    Martha Graham? Might you have meant Katherine Graham?

    Yes thank you for correcting me I should have double checked.

  107. @Mr. Anon
    "“I knew I had opened myself to the charge that I had either betrayed my own principles or concealed my real intentions.”

    Not really, given that Nixon's only real principle was to win re-election.

    I'm always amazed at how politicians do these sorts of things. I was young at the time, so I don't know how it went down. Did anyone raise objections to the Nixon administration at the time - not objections based on the efficacy of the policy, but on it's legality? I don't believe it is legal for the President to just decree that wages and prices can be frozen - not by a long shot. Just as it is not legal for the Obama administration to "close a loophole" in the law concerning the sale of firearms (by the way - a "loophole in the law" is properly known as "the law"), or to not deport illegal aliens, or declare CO2 to be a pollutant.

    The executive branch needs to be ruthlessly stomped on by Congress every single day to keep it in line. Every cabinet secretary needs to be hauled in and grilled by Congress on a weekly basis. The President - every President - should be in a state of impeachment all the time. In order to keep the Executive in line, Congress should be willing to use the power of the purse even to the extent of defunding the domestic budget of the White House - no fancy chefs, no staff, no honor guard, no helicopters - hell, no electricity. The First Family can make its own beds and dine on PBJ sandwiches by candlelight, and the President can drive himself around in his own minivan if he will not obey the law.

    The executive branch needs to be ruthlessly stomped on by Congress every single day to keep it in line. Every cabinet secretary needs to be hauled in and grilled by Congress on a weekly basis. The President – every President – should be in a state of impeachment all the time. In order to keep the Executive in line, Congress should be willing to use the power of the purse

    You’d need an honest Congress to make that work. Where on earth are you going to get an honest Congress from?

  108. @Felix.

    I understand less about the economy than ever before. The Fed is loaning money at zero %? Who is borrowing it? And why do they not borrow more and speculate with it? If import tariffs are bad why does the Chinese economy do so well? Why has the price of gold not continued to increase as the Peter Schiffs have predicted? Why no inflation despite federal deficit spending and central bank zero interest rates?
     
    The two bolded statements are closely related.

    Who is "borrowing" the money that the Fed is giving away for free? The Fed's cousins on Wall Steet.

    Why is there no inflation? There is inflation. It's called the equities aka stock market. If you or me received free money from the Fed (lol!), we'd go to the supermarket or the BMW dealership and buy more stuff, driving up the price of consumer goods, aka fueling inflation. When the Fed's cousins on Wall Street get free money from Bernanke or Yellen, they plow it straight into assets, chiefly equities. This is why the market is at an all time high, despite the underlying economy being in the utter dumps, with a labor force participation rate the lowest it's been since the introduction of the statistic. But when you create trillions of new money, that money has to go somewhere, hence the stock bubble.

    So yeah, the answer is that there is inflation, it's just in the sorts of things that the Fed's cousins on Wall Street buy, not the kinds of things that you or me buy. That money the Fed printed never made its way down to wages where we would get a hold of it, it stayed with the usual suspects like Jamie Dimon and Lloyd Blankfein on Wall Street

    This is why the market is at an all time high, despite the underlying economy being in the utter dumps, with a labor force participation rate the lowest it’s been since the introduction of the statistic.

    but corporate profits are at an all time high. $2 trilion per quarter. http://www.statista.com/statistics/222127/quarterly-corporate-profits-in-the-us/

    and even if stock prices are inflated that is money going into the economy, no? The Fed money was used to buy stocks which put money in the pocket of the seller.

  109. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    I'm not claiming that this is "the" answer, but it may be part of why such a massive increase in the money supply by the fed hasn't resulted in inflation.

    The Money Multiplier

    Yes, the fed flooded the banking system with money (important note: dollars are a form of credit) but commercial banks haven't been lending that money out at a particularly quick rate. Basically, the banks are - and have been - hoarding the cash flooded into the system by the fed.

    When a dollar is introduced into the banking system, it is deposited at a bank, which then lends it out to someone. That someone spends the money on something, which results in another person getting that dollar. That person then either saves the dollar (thus putting it into a bank to be lent again) or spends it on something and thus passing it along to someone else. This is how money multiplies and grows - the Money Multiplier.

    The fed throwing money into the system creates the liquidity to get the process started. However, if the banks hoard most of the money (and consumers quickly save their money rather than spending it out of fear), the money isn't multiplying itself at the same rate as in the past. The Velocity of Money (the speed at which money is multiplied or moves through the system) goes way down.

    Think of the money supply as firewood. You can have all the wood that you want, but without a match (or in a slow economy a smoldering fire in a light rain), you won't get much or any fire. However, if you have a ton of wood on the fire, you certainly have the potential for a seriously big fire.

    The Money Multiplier for the M2 monetary base was around eight before the financial crisis. It dropped to four after 2009 and continues to trickle down; it's around three right now.

    There's a lot of money in the system, but it's not moving around much.

    Another way to look at the situation (possibly even another argument) is to understand that a dollar is just another form of credit. It's a loan. Look at a dollar bill. At the top, it says Federal Reserve Note. Now, think back to 2008-2009. Banks dramatically cut back lending and consumers dramatically cut back borrowing. In essence, the amount of credit in the system was collapsing. The fed jumped in and replaced that credit with dollars (another form of credit). Because the amount of money supply (credit) increase matched the amount of credit destroyed by banks and consumers, the system stayed in balance and thus there was no inflation.

    Danger Will Robinson

    So what's the danger? The danger is that the fed won't be able to reduce the money supply fast enough if the money multiplier starts to increase or short-term interest rates start rising.

    To a degree, it's a question of the the utility of goods vs the utility of money. It's seems pretty balanced at the moment, but that could change.

    Regardless, it seems to me that while probably necessary during and immediately after the financial crisis, the fed's continued flooding of the system with money over the past couple of years has unnecessarily put the country in danger of inflation. The fed should move quicker to reduce its massive balance sheet.

    But, again, this is all just guesswork. Could be right, could be wrong, probably a bit of both.

    However, if the banks hoard most of the money (and consumers quickly save their money rather than spending it out of fear), the money isn’t multiplying itself at the same rate as in the past.

    yeah, I get this. The banks are required to keep a lot more reserves. So they borrow from the Fed to increase their reserves. But they take that borrowed money and use it to buy T-Bills, right? Which gives cash to the government to fund the deficit spending. Which is spending that goes directly in the pockets of American citizens. Which should increase inflation. But there is no sign of inflation.

    • Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country
    It's still about the velocity of money. The dollars just aren't being spun around as much. They keep ending up in the bank. Take a look at a fed chart showing the velocity of money.

    Also, Investopedia, which is a surprisingly good site, has a nice, quick summary. In particular, look at the charts on M2 (which takes into account the effects of fractional reserve banking and credit, and the monetary base. The monetary base shoots through the roof but M2 stays relatively stable.

    Credit was getting destroyed during the financial crisis (and has been slow growing since) offsetting the increase in the monetary base.
  110. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “…To a degree, it’s a question of the the utility of goods vs the utility of money.”

    I don’t understand economics. I kind of understand how you can at least measure money. It’s just there. I don’t understand how you can really, accurately measure the utility of goods, though it sounds good at first blush. Goods from what supplier? The good stuff or the cheap import version? What if the goods I really buy shift over time, perhaps capriciously? What if the cost of making the goods is divorced from the cost of the goods, that is, the manufacturer keeps making them cheaper but the price still goes up? What if my behavior changes, and I decide to just forgo a quarter of “the goods” I used to expect? What if a bunch of teenagers don’t really need all the goods they buy, but are driven by peer pressure?

  111. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @MEH 0910
    What a coincidence. Jack Davis did a Bonanza cover illustration for the August 14-20, 1971 issue of TV Guide:
    http://www.tvguidemagazine.com/archive/suboffer/1970s/1971/19710814_c1.jpg.html

    Richard Nixon then preempted Bonanza Sunday evening August 15th with his speech:
    http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=3115

    I don’t know if anyone else cares or not, but thanks for the link to Jack Davis. He seems to have been mostly from before my time, but I have recently come to the realization that the cartoonists in MAD, who were drawing throwaway panels for ten-year-olds, were some of the best in the business.

    I had sort of an obsession with Spy vs Spy when I was a kid, and recently found a book of all the old comics, and was surprised with how actually good they still are.

    I was impressed with the TIME comic too. Look at the detail on the rancher’s hand, for example. And when you first see it, both of the characters look really obnoxious, but when you look up close, they both loom sort of dignified, in a way. You don’t really get that anymore.

    And, for some reason, I thought that the rancher looked sort of like drawings of Bob Hope I had seen, even though he didn’t really look like him. So it was cool to learn that Jack Davis liked drawing Bob Hope.

    Anyway. That’s probably enough discussion of Jack Davis and that comic.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    …I have recently come to the realization that the cartoonists in MAD, who were drawing throwaway panels for ten-year-olds, were some of the best in the business.
     
    William Grimes had an unusual trick that made sure the best artists gravitated to Mad: he paid them on time.

    Similarly, a quick perusal of Writer's Market told you how Hef got all that great writing between his girlie shots. He paid freelancers three times what his closst competitors did. From the same liquor ad revenue.
    , @MEH 0910
    Actually, my favorite artist for MAD movie satires was Mort Drucker. He also drew the iconic poster for the movie American Graffiti.
  112. We need a shortage of immigrants. Let’s impose wage and price controls on them.

    Bu they already do a damned good job of keeping their prices down. We need to force those prices up.

    • Agree: Travis
  113. @SFG
    Yes and no. 'It's all money' tends to be a mistake of the Left, as opposed to the Right which tends to see tribal motivations where money is involved. Of course, people do things for a variety of reasons. It's similar to the Sailerian argument that human outcomes are nature and nurture versus the MSM view that it's all nurture.

    I'm not Merkel (or I would have closed the borders to Muslims claiming the threat of a wave of anti-Semitism ;) ), but seems to me there is some component of the old desire to 'do good by doing well', to satisfy selfish and selfless motives at once. The idea is that by accepting foreign immigrants from a disparate culture, Germany can cleanse itself of the stain of its Nazi past, as well as gain enough young workers to support its aging population. The problems are obvious--rape gangs in Cologne--but there you have it.

    Comments from people who actually live or work in Germany welcome.

    Germany can cleanse itself of the stain of its Nazi past

    I forgive the Germans for their past and I’m sure a lot of other people do too. Frankly I never hear people tarring Germans for their past. Older generations who had to fight the Nazis and suffer under them are dying off and they’re the ones who held the biggest grudges.

    I’d rather that Germany remain German – I’ll benefit personally from that outcome whereas Germany being lost to the world in order to remove some stain from the German soul gives me no benefit at all.

    • Replies: @SFG
    I actually agree, I'm just describing (what I assume is) Merkel's rationale.
  114. @2Mintzin1
    Nixon was a Republican.

    “Nixon was a Republican.”

    But he was not a conservative. He was a big government advocate.

  115. @Vinay
    Any possibility that Merkel's way of doing things is actually a smart way of avoiding the boiling-frog trap? After all, Germany admitted a large number of Turks over the years without generating anything as memorable as the Cologne grope-a-thon.

    This wasn't the only instant-feedback social experiment of 2015. You had De Blasio's denunciation of the NYPD almost instantly followed by cop funerals. You had the remarkable multi-city Instant Crime Wave just when politicians felt it safe to side with the protesters.

    If your opponents policies are doomed to fail, wouldn't you prefer the failure to be quick and spectacular?

    It doesn’t work that way. It’s impossible for leftist policies to fail quickly and spectacularly. I mean, they do, but the media will do everything in their power to cover up the failure. This of course includes fictional media maybe even more so than the news media.

    99.9%+ of people do not read Steve Sailer, so they get their information on what the media covers up only through the slow trickle of word-of-mouth and the occasional mealy-mouthed months-after-the-fact admissions by media outlets. For most people what’s on the TV is more “real” than real life.

  116. @anon
    I don't know if anyone else cares or not, but thanks for the link to Jack Davis. He seems to have been mostly from before my time, but I have recently come to the realization that the cartoonists in MAD, who were drawing throwaway panels for ten-year-olds, were some of the best in the business.

    I had sort of an obsession with Spy vs Spy when I was a kid, and recently found a book of all the old comics, and was surprised with how actually good they still are.

    I was impressed with the TIME comic too. Look at the detail on the rancher's hand, for example. And when you first see it, both of the characters look really obnoxious, but when you look up close, they both loom sort of dignified, in a way. You don't really get that anymore.

    And, for some reason, I thought that the rancher looked sort of like drawings of Bob Hope I had seen, even though he didn't really look like him. So it was cool to learn that Jack Davis liked drawing Bob Hope.

    Anyway. That's probably enough discussion of Jack Davis and that comic.

    …I have recently come to the realization that the cartoonists in MAD, who were drawing throwaway panels for ten-year-olds, were some of the best in the business.

    William Grimes had an unusual trick that made sure the best artists gravitated to Mad: he paid them on time.

    Similarly, a quick perusal of Writer’s Market told you how Hef got all that great writing between his girlie shots. He paid freelancers three times what his closst competitors did. From the same liquor ad revenue.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    William Gaines. Mea culpa.
  117. @Auntie Analogue
    Bonanza was a huge hit because NBC risked shooting & televising it in then-expensive color, when most people's owned B&W television sets and nearly all other programming was in B&W. Bonanza, and to a lesser extent the earlier Sunday evening telecast of Walt Disney's Wonderful World of Color hour, spurred a consumer stampede to buy color television sets. Viewers in their millions who weren't fond of horse operas tuned in to Bonanza on their new color sets - or on their relatives and neighbors or local taverns' color sets, purely because Bonanza was a color program; and this had the curious side-effect of converting many of those western-antipathetic viewers into loyal Bonanza fans. Its color telecasting even trumped Bonanza's rather early loss of the very popular Hoss Cartwright character upon Dan Blocker's death, as Bonanza continued to enjoy massive popularity with just its two remaining brothers. Even Pernell Roberts's later dismount from the role of Adam Cartwright scarcely budged Bonanza's excellent ratings.

    On the topic of Mr. Sailer's post, Nixon's wage & price controls were a minor fizzle-&-dud that had no long-term effect upon the United States, on Americans, or on the global economy; but Frau Merkel's and the EU's encouragement and enabling of Islamic jihad victory by hijra form a first-class self-inflicted needless, easily avoided catastrophe entailing epochal consequences, including the guaranteeing of ensuing waves of even more - and larger - hordes of immigrating Moslems.

    Re Bonanza, the Adam Cartwright character disappeared when Pernell Roberts left the series in 1965. Hoss Cartwright kept appearing until Dan Blocker’s death in 1972.

    I wasn’t a huge fan of Bonanza, and it had its liberal moments, but at least the largely Jewish cast, writers, and producers didn’t hate America.

    • Replies: @Auntie Analogue
    My dear CJ, thank you for pointing out my having flip-flopped the Bonanza departures of Pernell Roberts and Dan Blocker.

    Like you, I wasn't a fan of Bonanza, but my Grandpa, who lived with my family, was a horse opera addict for whom that program was nigh holy writ, so that by default I was sort of roped into watching more of its episodes than would have been my preference to have watched.

    Yes, MAD magazine's cartoonists and illustrators did sterling work which under today's humorless baleful regime of political correctness is now all the funnier.

    My dear Anonymous 8:06: thank you for recommending On The Buses which, though not yet stocked at my online DVD subscription service now appears there for future availability, so that I just saved it to my future titles' queue.

    I love the early years of Are You Being Served, and I also love the Carry On films, especially that franchise's pre-1970's installments. I was also a prime fan of The Benny Hill Show's earlier, pre-Hill's Angels episodes as they were first screened in the U.S., but whose episodes have, following Hill's death, been ineptly butchered and reassembled into disjointed feature-length DVD titles. And any film that features the delightful Joyce Grenfell succeeds at tickling my funny bone. For one thing, British comedy has in it the hilarious element of litotes which most American comedies suffer the lack of.

    Rubber-faced Norman Wisdom appeared in few films, almost all of which were shot on grimly low budgets, yet that man was a prime comic genius of the old Music Hall school. Absolute command of his body language made Widsom's sight gags marvels to behold. I recall fondly seeing Wisdom perform on The Ed Sullivan Show a solo routine in which he portrayed a hapless boxer that had me in stitches. He has a role in the American film The Night They Raided Minsky's, but the role was not well written and didn't begin to take advantage of Wisdom's superlative comic genius (that movie, though watchable because of its sprinkling of fine moments, on the whole was and remains an enormous near-miss).
  118. @Auntie Analogue
    Bonanza was a huge hit because NBC risked shooting & televising it in then-expensive color, when most people's owned B&W television sets and nearly all other programming was in B&W. Bonanza, and to a lesser extent the earlier Sunday evening telecast of Walt Disney's Wonderful World of Color hour, spurred a consumer stampede to buy color television sets. Viewers in their millions who weren't fond of horse operas tuned in to Bonanza on their new color sets - or on their relatives and neighbors or local taverns' color sets, purely because Bonanza was a color program; and this had the curious side-effect of converting many of those western-antipathetic viewers into loyal Bonanza fans. Its color telecasting even trumped Bonanza's rather early loss of the very popular Hoss Cartwright character upon Dan Blocker's death, as Bonanza continued to enjoy massive popularity with just its two remaining brothers. Even Pernell Roberts's later dismount from the role of Adam Cartwright scarcely budged Bonanza's excellent ratings.

    On the topic of Mr. Sailer's post, Nixon's wage & price controls were a minor fizzle-&-dud that had no long-term effect upon the United States, on Americans, or on the global economy; but Frau Merkel's and the EU's encouragement and enabling of Islamic jihad victory by hijra form a first-class self-inflicted needless, easily avoided catastrophe entailing epochal consequences, including the guaranteeing of ensuing waves of even more - and larger - hordes of immigrating Moslems.

    Motorola lost heavily betting on colour TV too early, i.e. investing in it back in the 50s and 60s before people were willing to buy colour sets in substantial numbers. It seems there’s such a thing as hitting on a good idea too soon. The economics writer “Adam Smith” (George Goodman) covers the episode in some detail in one of his books.

  119. @syonredux
    Should be borne in mind that "Are You Being Served?" made its debut in 1972....and stayed in production until 1985....

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unmkX15AeN8


    Not exactly a high-water mark for Anglo humor...

    What…?

    It was hilarious.

    If you want to see 1970s British comedy at its best, then I recommend the ‘On the Buses’ movie.
    I strongly doubt that it has ever been shown in America.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    'On the Buses' was the biggest grossing British movie of 1971, out grossing even 'Diamonds are Forever' despite costing only the merest fraction of the budget.

    The film was a spinoff from a popular TV sitcom - a common practice in Britain at that time.
    As I said the film is absolutely hilarious, but I doubt that it has ever been screened in the USA.
    Critics and feminists absolutely hate, hate, hate the film - and still do, and rather harshly always give it an extremely low ranking, despite its massive and lasting popularity.

    Strange as it might seem, in my opinion, the film gives probably the best and most accurate portrayal of the realities of British working class life, in the 1960s and 70s, that you'll ever likely to see anywhere.

    I believe the sitcom and the film have been shown in Australia, where it is extremely popular.
    Apparently a DJ over there specialises in 'Blakey' impersonations.
    , @tbraton
    I only saw "Are You Being Served?" every now and then on reruns on PBS, but I agree with you. The episodes I watched were pretty funny. Old fashioned and certainly not PC (I'm thinking of the blatantly homosexual sales clerk, the purple-haired sales woman, and the openly lecherous owner), but certainly funny. I believe a number of professional comedians have remarked how PC on college campuses have pretty much ruined stand up comedy in those venues. I think that is one of the reasons why Donald Trump is doing so well in the polls. He is very funny and certainly not politically correct. BTW check out Mark Steyn's latest piece on Trump's appearance in Bernie Sanders' Vermont that I caught on RCP this morning. Very astute and very funny in its own right. http://www.steynonline.com/7408/notes-on-a-phenomenon
    , @syonredux

    What…?

    It was hilarious.
     

    Too prole for my tastes, I'm afraid.

    And it certainly doesn't compare to the work of genuinely great humorists like James Thurber, WC Fields, Bob Newhart, etc

  120. @syonredux
    More on Tarantino's views on gun violence in the USA:

    “The only time black folks are safe is when white folks are disarmed,”

    It’s a pity Tarantino’s brain isn’t as big as his chin.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    His head is really big.
  121. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Big Bill
    If the Germans bring in a million+ horny Muslim males 20-35 years of age (sans women), who on earth is going to sexually service them? A few furtive holiday gang groping are the least of their problems going forward.

    If they really want to solve the problem of public fondling and rape with (what used to be) typical hard-headed German efficiency and rationality, they need to establish a federal Comfort Woman Corps and set up "Comfort Stations" across the country.

    Actually, prostitution in Germany is fully legal and fully tolerated.

    So-called ‘Eros Centers’ – really gigantic hypermarket style brothels – typical Teutonic efficiency more – are found on the outskirts if every major German population center.

    A fact that is not generally advertised as it doesn’t fit the lefty ‘exploitation’ narrative.

  122. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    What...?

    It was hilarious.

    If you want to see 1970s British comedy at its best, then I recommend the 'On the Buses' movie.
    I strongly doubt that it has ever been shown in America.

    ‘On the Buses’ was the biggest grossing British movie of 1971, out grossing even ‘Diamonds are Forever’ despite costing only the merest fraction of the budget.

    The film was a spinoff from a popular TV sitcom – a common practice in Britain at that time.
    As I said the film is absolutely hilarious, but I doubt that it has ever been screened in the USA.
    Critics and feminists absolutely hate, hate, hate the film – and still do, and rather harshly always give it an extremely low ranking, despite its massive and lasting popularity.

    Strange as it might seem, in my opinion, the film gives probably the best and most accurate portrayal of the realities of British working class life, in the 1960s and 70s, that you’ll ever likely to see anywhere.

    I believe the sitcom and the film have been shown in Australia, where it is extremely popular.
    Apparently a DJ over there specialises in ‘Blakey’ impersonations.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Another strange factoid.

    1950s manic British comedy star, the late Norman Wisdom, is or was the most popular man in Albania.
    Apparently, during the Hoxha regime, Norman Wisdom films were the only 'entertainment' films allowed to be shown, in that Norman Wisdom or 'Pitkin' as he was universally known in Albania represented the 'little man' fighting big business.
    , @Steve Sailer
    A lot of foreign hits that never get released in the U.S. are comedies of working class humor.
    , @syonredux

    I believe the sitcom and the film have been shown in Australia, where it is extremely popular.
    Apparently a DJ over there specialises in ‘Blakey’ impersonations.
     
    Popularity in Australia is not always a sign of quality. Cf Neighbours....
  123. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    'On the Buses' was the biggest grossing British movie of 1971, out grossing even 'Diamonds are Forever' despite costing only the merest fraction of the budget.

    The film was a spinoff from a popular TV sitcom - a common practice in Britain at that time.
    As I said the film is absolutely hilarious, but I doubt that it has ever been screened in the USA.
    Critics and feminists absolutely hate, hate, hate the film - and still do, and rather harshly always give it an extremely low ranking, despite its massive and lasting popularity.

    Strange as it might seem, in my opinion, the film gives probably the best and most accurate portrayal of the realities of British working class life, in the 1960s and 70s, that you'll ever likely to see anywhere.

    I believe the sitcom and the film have been shown in Australia, where it is extremely popular.
    Apparently a DJ over there specialises in 'Blakey' impersonations.

    Another strange factoid.

    1950s manic British comedy star, the late Norman Wisdom, is or was the most popular man in Albania.
    Apparently, during the Hoxha regime, Norman Wisdom films were the only ‘entertainment’ films allowed to be shown, in that Norman Wisdom or ‘Pitkin’ as he was universally known in Albania represented the ‘little man’ fighting big business.

  124. @Anonymous
    'On the Buses' was the biggest grossing British movie of 1971, out grossing even 'Diamonds are Forever' despite costing only the merest fraction of the budget.

    The film was a spinoff from a popular TV sitcom - a common practice in Britain at that time.
    As I said the film is absolutely hilarious, but I doubt that it has ever been screened in the USA.
    Critics and feminists absolutely hate, hate, hate the film - and still do, and rather harshly always give it an extremely low ranking, despite its massive and lasting popularity.

    Strange as it might seem, in my opinion, the film gives probably the best and most accurate portrayal of the realities of British working class life, in the 1960s and 70s, that you'll ever likely to see anywhere.

    I believe the sitcom and the film have been shown in Australia, where it is extremely popular.
    Apparently a DJ over there specialises in 'Blakey' impersonations.

    A lot of foreign hits that never get released in the U.S. are comedies of working class humor.

    • Replies: @syonredux

    A lot of foreign hits that never get released in the U.S. are comedies of working class humor.
     
    It's always interesting to note which comedy shows do well abroad. For example, The Phil Silvers Show was enormously popular in the UK:

    The series was shown weekly on BBC Television during its original run from 20 April 1957 onwards, in varying timeslots, with the final first run episode "Weekend Colonel" airing on 15 January 1961.[8] ITV also screened repeats of the series in most regions throughout the 60s, The series returned in repeats on BBC Television (later BBC One) from June 1961 to March 1967, after which it was absent from the screen until April 1973, when it returned in a late night timeslot, becoming a staple of BBC One's post-11pm late-night schedule throughout the 70s and 80s, usually appearing immediately prior to the channel's signoff (before BBC1 became a 24-hour broadcaster in November 1997). In recognition of the series' consistent popularity, it was moved to an early evening timeslot on BBC2, commencing a repeat run of all four series in broadcast order from 7 November 1984. This repeat run continued through to 22 November 1991, at which point the BBC had screened all available episodes. Episodes continued to be shown, although no longer in their original broadcast order, from 1993 to 2004, with the BBC's last broadcast episode "Bilko and the Flying Saucers" appearing on 5 November 2004.[8] It is currently being screened on Forces TV.

    The popularity of the program was underlined when the UK publication Radio Times Guide to Comedy ranked The Phil Silvers Show as its top TV sitcom.[9]
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Phil_Silvers_Show#UK_reception
  125. @Anonymous
    It's a pity Tarantino's brain isn't as big as his chin.

    His head is really big.

  126. @anon
    I don't know if anyone else cares or not, but thanks for the link to Jack Davis. He seems to have been mostly from before my time, but I have recently come to the realization that the cartoonists in MAD, who were drawing throwaway panels for ten-year-olds, were some of the best in the business.

    I had sort of an obsession with Spy vs Spy when I was a kid, and recently found a book of all the old comics, and was surprised with how actually good they still are.

    I was impressed with the TIME comic too. Look at the detail on the rancher's hand, for example. And when you first see it, both of the characters look really obnoxious, but when you look up close, they both loom sort of dignified, in a way. You don't really get that anymore.

    And, for some reason, I thought that the rancher looked sort of like drawings of Bob Hope I had seen, even though he didn't really look like him. So it was cool to learn that Jack Davis liked drawing Bob Hope.

    Anyway. That's probably enough discussion of Jack Davis and that comic.

    Actually, my favorite artist for MAD movie satires was Mort Drucker. He also drew the iconic poster for the movie American Graffiti.

  127. @Dave M.
    Just a small question, but where in the Constitution does the president get the authority to impose wage and price controls?

    “Just a small question, but where in the Constitution does the president get the authority to impose wage and price controls?”

    Nixon was acting pursuant to authority granted to him by Congress. “First, it’s usually Congress that lays the foundation for an imperial presidency with unconstitutional delegations of authority to the executive branch. The Economic Stabilization Act of 1970 gave Nixon legislative cover for his actions.

    The act was “a political dare,” according to top Nixon official George Shultz — the Democrats thought Nixon wouldn’t use the powers they’d granted him, but he called their bluff.” http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/remembering-nixons-wage-price-controls

    Whether Congress had such authority must be viewed in light of the then-existing thinking re Congress’ authority to regulate Interstate Commerce, which was thought to be virtually all embracing as a result of the Supreme Court decisions made by the FDR appointed Supreme Court. That’s why virtually the entire legal establishment thought a few years ago that the issue of the “individual mandate” imposed by Obamacare was a slam dunk and had no chance of being overturned by the Supreme Court. As far as wage and price controls, there was the history of them being imposed during WWII and the Korean War.

    Probably the silliest argument to emerge from the Nixon w-and-p controls fiasco was that “it was necessary to impose them to show they don’t work.” Well, they certainly worked to get Nixon reelected in a landslide. I guess the same argument can be made in the context of “affirmative action” (initiated under Nixon) and the Iraq War (started by GWB). There is no end of bad policies which just be justified under that mantra.

    For a good review of w-and-p controls generally, see http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Wage_and_Price_Controls.aspx

  128. @Blobby5
    Funny how Yergin didn't mention LBJ's guns AND butter spending as cause of inflation.

    How is this any different from anti price 'gouging' laws after disasters? Price controls = shortage. All lessons haven't been learned.

    “LBJ’s guns AND butter spending as cause of …” many of the world’s economic troubles ever since. Nixon’s price control policy was daft, but unless he’d rolled back LBJ’s welfare state, and closed down the Vietnam war faster and more cheaply than he did, he was bound to find himself facing a choice of bad options.

  129. @Hodag
    Wage and price controls gave us several novel names for steaks, free from controls.

    Anyone ever have a hanger steak? My current favorite. Deep beefy flavor, quick to cook, tender. Skirt and flank steak used to be cheap but with carne asada so popular it costs almost as much as ribeye. Hanger steak is cheaper than sirloin and much better, especially on a steak salad. Sirloin only gets tender with a long sous vide soak, and I don't have time for that.

    Steak talk is more interesting than Nixon.

    What is a “hanger steak”? Does it just mean a steak from beef that has been properly hung? How deeply unamerican.

    • Replies: @cthulhu
    Hanger steak is from the diaphragm area and is called that because it appears to hang from the diaphragm. The cut is related to skirt steak. Conventionally cooked, you have to be careful that the cut doesn't get tough, but sous vide cooking works wonderfully with it (and skirt steak as well). Hanger steak is known as one of the most flavorful cuts of beef.
    , @Brutusale
    We get it from the French. They used the onglet (hanger/skirt/London broil) and the bavette (flank) for steak frites. Tough if overdone, but tasty when grilled properly.
  130. @The Anti-Gnostic
    Good questions. I have another one: why is gasoline cheaper--by over half--than it was eight years ago?

    Atlanta is BOOMING with construction. Labor force participation is declining. And I see more high-end luxury cars in a year than I remember seeing my entire life previous. Strange days.

    “Strange days.” Spot on. Could it be the End Times? No. But it might soon be the bloody awful times.

  131. makes one want to send the day watching TV land.

  132. @Reg Cæsar

    …I have recently come to the realization that the cartoonists in MAD, who were drawing throwaway panels for ten-year-olds, were some of the best in the business.
     
    William Grimes had an unusual trick that made sure the best artists gravitated to Mad: he paid them on time.

    Similarly, a quick perusal of Writer's Market told you how Hef got all that great writing between his girlie shots. He paid freelancers three times what his closst competitors did. From the same liquor ad revenue.

    William Gaines. Mea culpa.

  133. @Blobby5
    Schiff once asked Taleb to give him one example of when people would defer gratification in purchasing in the hopes of a small percent reduction in the following year. In fact many buy on credit, so there are few rational actors.

    The gold supply increases about 3 percent a year, what Friedman wanted anyway.

    James Grant also speaks of the alleged boogeyman of deflation, it is helpful to most but dangerous to governments and bankers.

    1.5% actually.

  134. @Steve Richter

    However, if the banks hoard most of the money (and consumers quickly save their money rather than spending it out of fear), the money isn’t multiplying itself at the same rate as in the past.
     
    yeah, I get this. The banks are required to keep a lot more reserves. So they borrow from the Fed to increase their reserves. But they take that borrowed money and use it to buy T-Bills, right? Which gives cash to the government to fund the deficit spending. Which is spending that goes directly in the pockets of American citizens. Which should increase inflation. But there is no sign of inflation.

    It’s still about the velocity of money. The dollars just aren’t being spun around as much. They keep ending up in the bank. Take a look at a fed chart showing the velocity of money.

    Also, Investopedia, which is a surprisingly good site, has a nice, quick summary. In particular, look at the charts on M2 (which takes into account the effects of fractional reserve banking and credit, and the monetary base. The monetary base shoots through the roof but M2 stays relatively stable.

    Credit was getting destroyed during the financial crisis (and has been slow growing since) offsetting the increase in the monetary base.

  135. @Anonymous
    What...?

    It was hilarious.

    If you want to see 1970s British comedy at its best, then I recommend the 'On the Buses' movie.
    I strongly doubt that it has ever been shown in America.

    I only saw “Are You Being Served?” every now and then on reruns on PBS, but I agree with you. The episodes I watched were pretty funny. Old fashioned and certainly not PC (I’m thinking of the blatantly homosexual sales clerk, the purple-haired sales woman, and the openly lecherous owner), but certainly funny. I believe a number of professional comedians have remarked how PC on college campuses have pretty much ruined stand up comedy in those venues. I think that is one of the reasons why Donald Trump is doing so well in the polls. He is very funny and certainly not politically correct. BTW check out Mark Steyn’s latest piece on Trump’s appearance in Bernie Sanders’ Vermont that I caught on RCP this morning. Very astute and very funny in its own right. http://www.steynonline.com/7408/notes-on-a-phenomenon

    • Replies: @syonredux

    The episodes I watched were pretty funny. Old fashioned and certainly not PC (I’m thinking of the blatantly homosexual sales clerk, the purple-haired sales woman, and the openly lecherous owner), but certainly funny.
     
    Don't mistake being Politically Incorrect for being funny.
  136. @SFG
    It may work out that way, but I doubt it. 'I'm going to do X so it fails and everyone then wants not-X' is great in movies, but usually if a politician does something and it fails big-time, they often lose their jobs. Politicians like power. It's like those conspiracy theories where Bill Clinton is paying Trump to run so he'll lose and his wife will become President. Unlikely, but you have to admit it would make a great movie.

    Regarding Herr Trump –

    I considered the possibility that in the beginning of his campaign he was a shill for Hillary, however, if he was, he is no longer.

    The groundswell of support across demographic lines for Mr Trump is so great (and growing) that, were he to somehow throw the election to Hillary, he would go down as probably the greatest rogue in American history.

    Knowing what I do of Donald Trump’s background and business savvy, I am confident that among all the current candidates, he is the only one with any chance at making “America Great Again!”

  137. The Nixon administration knew price controls were not a solution to inflation, and instituted them for political gain…..which is one reason the price controls lasted for 3 months. and his plan actually worked to benefit Nixon…..it increased his popularity….although he knew the policy would fail to control inflation it helped him win the election, thus his policy was a success not a failure.

    Merkel also had an alternative agenda, she invited in millions of muslims to appease her masters, and with little political opposition in Germany, she faced little risk of losing political power from her decision….as right wing sentiment in Germany is against the law, any critics of Islam will be jailed in Germany. Merkel’s plan so far has worked to increase her Status in the world…she is more popular among the elites today than ever before in her career. Viewed from the perspective of Merkel , her policy was a success so far.

    Merkels decision will prove to be a failure for the German people , but so far her political career is in no danger from her policy mistakes.

  138. Didn’t price controls remain on oil until Reagan removed them in 1981? I think that they contributed to the gasoline shortages of the late 1970s. I still remember odd-even refueling days–hell if you wanted to take a trip.

    • Replies: @Travis
    Reagan's first executive order eliminated price controls on oil and natural gas. Production soared, and the price of oil declined by more than 50 percent. This was a remarkable contrast to President Carter's gasoline rationing, which limited us to buying gasoline every other day depending on the last number of our license plate. From scarcity of gasoline to abundance in six months--this was one of Reagan's notable accomplishments.
    , @Jim Don Bob
    Diversity Heretic said, "Didn’t price controls remain on oil until Reagan removed them in 1981?"

    Yes
  139. @TangoMan
    Germany can cleanse itself of the stain of its Nazi past

    I forgive the Germans for their past and I'm sure a lot of other people do too. Frankly I never hear people tarring Germans for their past. Older generations who had to fight the Nazis and suffer under them are dying off and they're the ones who held the biggest grudges.

    I'd rather that Germany remain German - I'll benefit personally from that outcome whereas Germany being lost to the world in order to remove some stain from the German soul gives me no benefit at all.

    I actually agree, I’m just describing (what I assume is) Merkel’s rationale.

  140. @CJ
    Re Bonanza, the Adam Cartwright character disappeared when Pernell Roberts left the series in 1965. Hoss Cartwright kept appearing until Dan Blocker's death in 1972.

    I wasn't a huge fan of Bonanza, and it had its liberal moments, but at least the largely Jewish cast, writers, and producers didn't hate America.

    My dear CJ, thank you for pointing out my having flip-flopped the Bonanza departures of Pernell Roberts and Dan Blocker.

    Like you, I wasn’t a fan of Bonanza, but my Grandpa, who lived with my family, was a horse opera addict for whom that program was nigh holy writ, so that by default I was sort of roped into watching more of its episodes than would have been my preference to have watched.

    Yes, MAD magazine’s cartoonists and illustrators did sterling work which under today’s humorless baleful regime of political correctness is now all the funnier.

    My dear Anonymous 8:06: thank you for recommending On The Buses which, though not yet stocked at my online DVD subscription service now appears there for future availability, so that I just saved it to my future titles’ queue.

    I love the early years of Are You Being Served, and I also love the Carry On films, especially that franchise’s pre-1970’s installments. I was also a prime fan of The Benny Hill Show’s earlier, pre-Hill’s Angels episodes as they were first screened in the U.S., but whose episodes have, following Hill’s death, been ineptly butchered and reassembled into disjointed feature-length DVD titles. And any film that features the delightful Joyce Grenfell succeeds at tickling my funny bone. For one thing, British comedy has in it the hilarious element of litotes which most American comedies suffer the lack of.

    Rubber-faced Norman Wisdom appeared in few films, almost all of which were shot on grimly low budgets, yet that man was a prime comic genius of the old Music Hall school. Absolute command of his body language made Widsom’s sight gags marvels to behold. I recall fondly seeing Wisdom perform on The Ed Sullivan Show a solo routine in which he portrayed a hapless boxer that had me in stitches. He has a role in the American film The Night They Raided Minsky’s, but the role was not well written and didn’t begin to take advantage of Wisdom’s superlative comic genius (that movie, though watchable because of its sprinkling of fine moments, on the whole was and remains an enormous near-miss).

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Yep.

    The 1960s and 70s were a golden age for British comedy. Back in the day, TV comedy was dominated by old school hacks - cynical, embittered, pouchy face middle aged men who cast a jaundiced eye on the world, but who were very very funny. Tony Hancock was the doyenne of British comedy, but there was a whole host of talent which graduated through the 'school of hard knocks' which was the old time variety circuit. Most of the great British comics of that period graduated -literally- between strip acts staged at Paul Raymond's infamous Windmill Theatre.
    If a comic was no good, he'd be bottled off at stage, at least at the rougher Glasgow theaters and the northern working men's clubs.
    British TV sitcoms of that time, which were great, were fixated in that typically British theme of class struggle. Noteworthy is 'Steptoe & Son' written by Galton and Simpson, Tony Hancock's writers.
    Hancock's venture on the big screen, 'The Rebel' is hilarious.

    , @dfordoom

    and I also love the Carry On films, especially that franchise’s pre-1970′s installments.
     
    The Carry On movies were terrific. And amazingly politically incorrect. There are no modern comics in the same league as Sid James or Kenneth Williams.
  141. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Auntie Analogue
    My dear CJ, thank you for pointing out my having flip-flopped the Bonanza departures of Pernell Roberts and Dan Blocker.

    Like you, I wasn't a fan of Bonanza, but my Grandpa, who lived with my family, was a horse opera addict for whom that program was nigh holy writ, so that by default I was sort of roped into watching more of its episodes than would have been my preference to have watched.

    Yes, MAD magazine's cartoonists and illustrators did sterling work which under today's humorless baleful regime of political correctness is now all the funnier.

    My dear Anonymous 8:06: thank you for recommending On The Buses which, though not yet stocked at my online DVD subscription service now appears there for future availability, so that I just saved it to my future titles' queue.

    I love the early years of Are You Being Served, and I also love the Carry On films, especially that franchise's pre-1970's installments. I was also a prime fan of The Benny Hill Show's earlier, pre-Hill's Angels episodes as they were first screened in the U.S., but whose episodes have, following Hill's death, been ineptly butchered and reassembled into disjointed feature-length DVD titles. And any film that features the delightful Joyce Grenfell succeeds at tickling my funny bone. For one thing, British comedy has in it the hilarious element of litotes which most American comedies suffer the lack of.

    Rubber-faced Norman Wisdom appeared in few films, almost all of which were shot on grimly low budgets, yet that man was a prime comic genius of the old Music Hall school. Absolute command of his body language made Widsom's sight gags marvels to behold. I recall fondly seeing Wisdom perform on The Ed Sullivan Show a solo routine in which he portrayed a hapless boxer that had me in stitches. He has a role in the American film The Night They Raided Minsky's, but the role was not well written and didn't begin to take advantage of Wisdom's superlative comic genius (that movie, though watchable because of its sprinkling of fine moments, on the whole was and remains an enormous near-miss).

    Yep.

    The 1960s and 70s were a golden age for British comedy. Back in the day, TV comedy was dominated by old school hacks – cynical, embittered, pouchy face middle aged men who cast a jaundiced eye on the world, but who were very very funny. Tony Hancock was the doyenne of British comedy, but there was a whole host of talent which graduated through the ‘school of hard knocks’ which was the old time variety circuit. Most of the great British comics of that period graduated -literally- between strip acts staged at Paul Raymond’s infamous Windmill Theatre.
    If a comic was no good, he’d be bottled off at stage, at least at the rougher Glasgow theaters and the northern working men’s clubs.
    British TV sitcoms of that time, which were great, were fixated in that typically British theme of class struggle. Noteworthy is ‘Steptoe & Son’ written by Galton and Simpson, Tony Hancock’s writers.
    Hancock’s venture on the big screen, ‘The Rebel’ is hilarious.

  142. @Steve Richter

    David Stockman says breaking the link to gold was the big blunder of that night
     
    But if we stayed on gold wouldn't that cause deflation? As production and the population increases and the amount of money stays the same prices have to fall. Which makes it profitable for people to hold onto their money since tomorrow a gold coin can buy more stuff than it does today.

    Stockman has been predicting financial ruin for a number of years now. Has he adjusted his thinking, acknowledged that he was wrong?

    But if we stayed on gold wouldn’t that cause deflation? As production and the population increases and the amount of money stays the same prices have to fall.

    A lower price is a good thing. It means a higher standard of living.

  143. @Diversity Heretic
    Didn't price controls remain on oil until Reagan removed them in 1981? I think that they contributed to the gasoline shortages of the late 1970s. I still remember odd-even refueling days--hell if you wanted to take a trip.

    Reagan’s first executive order eliminated price controls on oil and natural gas. Production soared, and the price of oil declined by more than 50 percent. This was a remarkable contrast to President Carter’s gasoline rationing, which limited us to buying gasoline every other day depending on the last number of our license plate. From scarcity of gasoline to abundance in six months–this was one of Reagan’s notable accomplishments.

  144. @Diversity Heretic
    Didn't price controls remain on oil until Reagan removed them in 1981? I think that they contributed to the gasoline shortages of the late 1970s. I still remember odd-even refueling days--hell if you wanted to take a trip.

    Diversity Heretic said, “Didn’t price controls remain on oil until Reagan removed them in 1981?”

    Yes

  145. @Anonymous
    The draft didn't end until the end of 1972 so by then it was too late for Nixon to be anything but the devil to the left. Anyway, they hated him since he ran against Kennedy. They couldn't stand Goldwater either.

    “hey hated him since he ran against Kennedy. ”

    The Kennedy cult is truly something. It’s the real beginning of politics-as-phantasm. The left mindlessly idolizes him when LBJ was the high water mark of liberalism. Southerner hate, I guess.

    • Replies: @Brutusale
    As I've written before on these threads, politics in Massachusetts will never return to sanity until the last Irishman who grew up in Southie/Dot/Charlestown in the Fifties and Sixties with photos of JFK, Cardinal Cushing and the Pope on the mantel has gone to his long reward.
  146. This really is worth watching: a careful look at an explanation from Merkel herself about why she triggered the Muslim invasion.

  147. @dearieme
    What is a "hanger steak"? Does it just mean a steak from beef that has been properly hung? How deeply unamerican.

    Hanger steak is from the diaphragm area and is called that because it appears to hang from the diaphragm. The cut is related to skirt steak. Conventionally cooked, you have to be careful that the cut doesn’t get tough, but sous vide cooking works wonderfully with it (and skirt steak as well). Hanger steak is known as one of the most flavorful cuts of beef.

  148. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    “Inflation” is a political concept, not simply an economic one. Inflation is measured by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which looks at changes in the price of a specific basket of goods. What this basket consists of is influenced by political interests and considerations. Stocks and real estate, for example, are not included in the basket. This is because inflation in stock and real estate prices is considered to be a good thing by dominant political interests, which tend to be wealthy people who disproportionately own lots of equities and real estate. Inflation in wages or consumer goods is considered bad because the dominant political interests are the wealthy who hire labor, and because rises in basic consumer goods like food can lead to popular unrest.

    A pro-labor government could have a different measure of inflation that focuses on stock and real estate prices and deemphasizes wages and labor produced goods prices.

    • Agree: Stephen R. Diamond
  149. @Auntie Analogue
    Bonanza was a huge hit because NBC risked shooting & televising it in then-expensive color, when most people's owned B&W television sets and nearly all other programming was in B&W. Bonanza, and to a lesser extent the earlier Sunday evening telecast of Walt Disney's Wonderful World of Color hour, spurred a consumer stampede to buy color television sets. Viewers in their millions who weren't fond of horse operas tuned in to Bonanza on their new color sets - or on their relatives and neighbors or local taverns' color sets, purely because Bonanza was a color program; and this had the curious side-effect of converting many of those western-antipathetic viewers into loyal Bonanza fans. Its color telecasting even trumped Bonanza's rather early loss of the very popular Hoss Cartwright character upon Dan Blocker's death, as Bonanza continued to enjoy massive popularity with just its two remaining brothers. Even Pernell Roberts's later dismount from the role of Adam Cartwright scarcely budged Bonanza's excellent ratings.

    On the topic of Mr. Sailer's post, Nixon's wage & price controls were a minor fizzle-&-dud that had no long-term effect upon the United States, on Americans, or on the global economy; but Frau Merkel's and the EU's encouragement and enabling of Islamic jihad victory by hijra form a first-class self-inflicted needless, easily avoided catastrophe entailing epochal consequences, including the guaranteeing of ensuing waves of even more - and larger - hordes of immigrating Moslems.

    The auto industry, which had been down in 1970, made the most of it. Lee Iacocca said “this is a real sweet deal for buyers of American cars. We’re not going to defy the president.” Sales were up in 71, 72 and 73, but back down in 74.

  150. Will Western elites ever have a ‘what have I done’ moment?

    Merkel’s bridge must be blown up.

    All this bridge metaphor by the GLOB.

    Clinton spoke of bridge to 21st century.

    Obama is the bridge.

    We need to blow it up. Down with globsters.

  151. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ragnar%C3%B6k#Gylfaginning_chapter_51

    “During all of this, the sky splits into two. From the split, the ‘sons of Muspell’ ride forth. Surtr rides first, surrounded by flames, his sword brighter than the sun. High says that ‘Muspell’s sons’ will ride across Bifröst, described in Gylfaginning as a rainbow bridge, and that the bridge will then break.”

    Rag-Narok crashing into Europe for some Rape-narok.

    Stupid whore Merkel plays duped Brunnhilde.

  152. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:

    Maybe, like Steven Avery, Merkel is not guilty of the crime she is accused of.

    • Replies: @Palerider1861
    Judge Jeanine Piro on her show last night exposed the Netflix "documentary" as being flawed when it left out crucial evidence supporting the prosecution.

    Some points:

    - the blood splatter collected and analyzed by the FBI showed showed it could not have been planted there due to the absence of the preservative chemical in the blood sample previously taken from him.

    - the presence of sweat DNA from Avery collected on the hood release of the car is impossible to plant (Avery had said he was never near the car)

    - no mention of the items, including the victim's purse and bits of bone fragments, found in Avery's burn barrel in his yard

    - Netflix told viewers that the deputies were ordered by the court to stay away from the crime scene unless supervised, a statement flatly denied by the very Sheriff himself

    Seems Netflix decided they were going to retry Avery using only defense arguments, and casting doubt on his guilt through devious and slick programming...I would have bet this was an HBO production, frankly.

    It's a shame the victim has been forgotten in this travesty of a show.

  153. @Auntie Analogue
    My dear CJ, thank you for pointing out my having flip-flopped the Bonanza departures of Pernell Roberts and Dan Blocker.

    Like you, I wasn't a fan of Bonanza, but my Grandpa, who lived with my family, was a horse opera addict for whom that program was nigh holy writ, so that by default I was sort of roped into watching more of its episodes than would have been my preference to have watched.

    Yes, MAD magazine's cartoonists and illustrators did sterling work which under today's humorless baleful regime of political correctness is now all the funnier.

    My dear Anonymous 8:06: thank you for recommending On The Buses which, though not yet stocked at my online DVD subscription service now appears there for future availability, so that I just saved it to my future titles' queue.

    I love the early years of Are You Being Served, and I also love the Carry On films, especially that franchise's pre-1970's installments. I was also a prime fan of The Benny Hill Show's earlier, pre-Hill's Angels episodes as they were first screened in the U.S., but whose episodes have, following Hill's death, been ineptly butchered and reassembled into disjointed feature-length DVD titles. And any film that features the delightful Joyce Grenfell succeeds at tickling my funny bone. For one thing, British comedy has in it the hilarious element of litotes which most American comedies suffer the lack of.

    Rubber-faced Norman Wisdom appeared in few films, almost all of which were shot on grimly low budgets, yet that man was a prime comic genius of the old Music Hall school. Absolute command of his body language made Widsom's sight gags marvels to behold. I recall fondly seeing Wisdom perform on The Ed Sullivan Show a solo routine in which he portrayed a hapless boxer that had me in stitches. He has a role in the American film The Night They Raided Minsky's, but the role was not well written and didn't begin to take advantage of Wisdom's superlative comic genius (that movie, though watchable because of its sprinkling of fine moments, on the whole was and remains an enormous near-miss).

    and I also love the Carry On films, especially that franchise’s pre-1970′s installments.

    The Carry On movies were terrific. And amazingly politically incorrect. There are no modern comics in the same league as Sid James or Kenneth Williams.

  154. Off Topic:

    I haven’t seen anybody else comment on this anywhere, but is actually quite remarkable that no one won the powerball drawing. I read that over 440 million tickets were sold. That amounts to 1.5 tickets sold for every number possible. The winning numbers did not seem to me to be unusual, ie not 4 or 5 in a row.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    The release date for the schedule for the 2016 iSteve fundraising drives has been postponed until Thursday.
  155. @Name Withheld
    Off Topic:

    I haven't seen anybody else comment on this anywhere, but is actually quite remarkable that no one won the powerball drawing. I read that over 440 million tickets were sold. That amounts to 1.5 tickets sold for every number possible. The winning numbers did not seem to me to be unusual, ie not 4 or 5 in a row.

    The release date for the schedule for the 2016 iSteve fundraising drives has been postponed until Thursday.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    If the 2016 iSteve Strategic Financial Restructuring Plan works out on Wednesday ...
  156. Most of the “On The Buses” episodes are up on Youtube. Extremely popular in Canada in my teenage days. Very Brit working class. Blakey, the station manager, is phenomenal.
    Oddly enough, I heard a radio host almost choke today when during a discussion on favourite tv shows.”But its so dated. And sexist.”

    https://www.google.ca/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=HCmTVv2TLceC8Qfw9bzoDg&gws_rd=ssl#q=%22on+the+buses%22+%22youtube%22

    An American remake, Lotsa Luck, with Dom Deluise didn’t do it very well.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Strangely enough, David Frost - he of Nixon fame - was a very big cheese in British comedy.
    David Frost was one of the founders of UK commercial television franchise holders LWT or London Weekend Television.
    Frost insisted that LWT made a lot of comedy, 'On the Buses' was a quintessential LWT show.
    Of course, David Frost's career started in satire and comedy. 'The Two Ronnie's' another hilarious Brit comedy show, owes its existence to David Frost.
  157. @Flip
    I never quite understood why the leftist press and the SWPL hated Nixon so much. He was pretty leftist in how he ran things what with the EPA and affirmative action. Did they hold his earlier Red baiting against him?

    >>> I never quite understood why the leftist press and the SWPL hated Nixon so much

    When the Democrat didn’t get elected, the Left didn’t get government jobs.

    It REALLY IS mostly as simple as that.

    There is very little complexity in life. In fact, there is very little complexity in anything except Quantum physics. And you can live with a lot less tranquilizer-prescription expense, by assuming that Quantum physics doesn’t really exist.

    • Replies: @CJ
    When the Democrat didn’t get elected, the Left didn’t get government jobs.

    When they don't win, they don't eat. It helps explain their strong motivation.
  158. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Bob123
    Most of the "On The Buses" episodes are up on Youtube. Extremely popular in Canada in my teenage days. Very Brit working class. Blakey, the station manager, is phenomenal.
    Oddly enough, I heard a radio host almost choke today when during a discussion on favourite tv shows."But its so dated. And sexist."

    https://www.google.ca/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=HCmTVv2TLceC8Qfw9bzoDg&gws_rd=ssl#q=%22on+the+buses%22+%22youtube%22


    An American remake, Lotsa Luck, with Dom Deluise didn't do it very well.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaUEfOgRU0s

    @Auntie Analogue

    Strangely enough, David Frost – he of Nixon fame – was a very big cheese in British comedy.
    David Frost was one of the founders of UK commercial television franchise holders LWT or London Weekend Television.
    Frost insisted that LWT made a lot of comedy, ‘On the Buses’ was a quintessential LWT show.
    Of course, David Frost’s career started in satire and comedy. ‘The Two Ronnie’s’ another hilarious Brit comedy show, owes its existence to David Frost.

  159. @Steve Sailer
    The release date for the schedule for the 2016 iSteve fundraising drives has been postponed until Thursday.

    If the 2016 iSteve Strategic Financial Restructuring Plan works out on Wednesday …

    • Replies: @Rob McX
    Would an iSteve Lottery be illegal?
  160. @Steve Sailer
    If the 2016 iSteve Strategic Financial Restructuring Plan works out on Wednesday ...

    Would an iSteve Lottery be illegal?

  161. “Cash for Clunkers” looks like this with hindsight – a silly or at best irrelevant policy that all the luminaries lived at the time.

  162. @The most deplorable one
    Maybe, like Steven Avery, Merkel is not guilty of the crime she is accused of.

    Judge Jeanine Piro on her show last night exposed the Netflix “documentary” as being flawed when it left out crucial evidence supporting the prosecution.

    Some points:

    – the blood splatter collected and analyzed by the FBI showed showed it could not have been planted there due to the absence of the preservative chemical in the blood sample previously taken from him.

    – the presence of sweat DNA from Avery collected on the hood release of the car is impossible to plant (Avery had said he was never near the car)

    – no mention of the items, including the victim’s purse and bits of bone fragments, found in Avery’s burn barrel in his yard

    – Netflix told viewers that the deputies were ordered by the court to stay away from the crime scene unless supervised, a statement flatly denied by the very Sheriff himself

    Seems Netflix decided they were going to retry Avery using only defense arguments, and casting doubt on his guilt through devious and slick programming…I would have bet this was an HBO production, frankly.

    It’s a shame the victim has been forgotten in this travesty of a show.

  163. @Mr. Anon
    A lot of the visceral hatred of Nixon is, I think, due to life-style liberalism: Baby-boomers who fondly remember voting for McGovern as some kind of liberating act of generational revolution, and who will forever associate Nixon with their crass, middle-class, depression-era parents. It was and is a form of status-signalling.

    Mind you, there are perfectly good reasons for despising Richard Nixon too, if you are a rightist.

    Baby-boomers who fondly remember voting for McGovern…

    Nixon likely carried the vote of those born 1946-54, along with everyone else, though I’m willing to look at evidence to the contrary. Squares outnumbered the cool even in 1972. The Silent Majority were still being born after 1945.

    their crass, middle-class, depression-era parents…

    …who just eight years earlier gave a landslide to LBJ, the very personification of “crass”. The champion of the “middle crass”!

    “Boomers” went for Goldwater that year, albeit in the only state any of them were allowed to vote.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    I didn't mean all baby-boomers; obviously, a lot of them did vote for Nixon. I meant that to the left-leaning boomers, Nixon seemed to stand for everything that they considered icky about their parents' generation, and continued to fill that role, even after he left office.
  164. @Sam Haysom
    I don't really buy this. Opposition to the war on college campuses basically collapsed when Nixon rescinded the draft.

    I would actually argue that when Nixon was president he actually wasn't that hated by the left. The old left/ red diaper baby hatred of Nixon for nailing Hiss had subsided by 68 and the New Left/ Boomer nostlagic hatred for Nixon hadn't yet crystallized. If Nixon hadn't angered Martha Grahmn by denying her FCC licenses he probally would have skated on Watergate.

    That said the landslide election in 72 terrified the left so that probally reignited Nixon hatred on the left, but during his first term at least Nixon was hated by the left only as much as any Republican would have been hated.

    You’ve never actually read anything written under Nixon, evidently.

  165. @Karl
    >>> I never quite understood why the leftist press and the SWPL hated Nixon so much

    When the Democrat didn't get elected, the Left didn't get government jobs.

    It REALLY IS mostly as simple as that.

    There is very little complexity in life. In fact, there is very little complexity in anything except Quantum physics. And you can live with a lot less tranquilizer-prescription expense, by assuming that Quantum physics doesn't really exist.

    When the Democrat didn’t get elected, the Left didn’t get government jobs.

    When they don’t win, they don’t eat. It helps explain their strong motivation.

  166. @Anonymous
    What...?

    It was hilarious.

    If you want to see 1970s British comedy at its best, then I recommend the 'On the Buses' movie.
    I strongly doubt that it has ever been shown in America.

    What…?

    It was hilarious.

    Too prole for my tastes, I’m afraid.

    And it certainly doesn’t compare to the work of genuinely great humorists like James Thurber, WC Fields, Bob Newhart, etc

  167. @Reg Cæsar

    Baby-boomers who fondly remember voting for McGovern…
     
    Nixon likely carried the vote of those born 1946-54, along with everyone else, though I'm willing to look at evidence to the contrary. Squares outnumbered the cool even in 1972. The Silent Majority were still being born after 1945.

    their crass, middle-class, depression-era parents…
     
    …who just eight years earlier gave a landslide to LBJ, the very personification of "crass". The champion of the "middle crass"!

    "Boomers" went for Goldwater that year, albeit in the only state any of them were allowed to vote.

    I didn’t mean all baby-boomers; obviously, a lot of them did vote for Nixon. I meant that to the left-leaning boomers, Nixon seemed to stand for everything that they considered icky about their parents’ generation, and continued to fill that role, even after he left office.

  168. @Flip
    I never quite understood why the leftist press and the SWPL hated Nixon so much. He was pretty leftist in how he ran things what with the EPA and affirmative action. Did they hold his earlier Red baiting against him?

    Did they hold his earlier Red baiting against him?

    Yes.

  169. @whorefinder
    As with most government intervention, price controls aren't about controlling prices and are all about making the government look like it's doing something. It's a political maneuver, not actually designed to help, but to look like it's helping. When it lasts long enough to judge its effects, however, it is shown to be folly.

    That's why FDR's New Deal policies---which were really Hoover's, but let's simplify for now---were met with much enthusiasm at first: the government is doing something! Had it not been for WW2 burnishing his image (and a lot of lefty propaganda), however, FDR's policies would have looked like failures in retrospect. There is much to the idea that FDR wanted us involved in WW2 to save his legacy, since his administration to 1941 hadn't resolved anything about the Depression.

    I remember reading Robert McNamara’s statement to one of the generals developing plans for Vietnam: “General, you don’t have a war plan! All you have is a kind of horrible spasm!” and I thought, wow, that’s true of pretty much everything government does.

  170. @dearieme
    What is a "hanger steak"? Does it just mean a steak from beef that has been properly hung? How deeply unamerican.

    We get it from the French. They used the onglet (hanger/skirt/London broil) and the bavette (flank) for steak frites. Tough if overdone, but tasty when grilled properly.

  171. @yaqub the mad scientist
    "hey hated him since he ran against Kennedy. "

    The Kennedy cult is truly something. It's the real beginning of politics-as-phantasm. The left mindlessly idolizes him when LBJ was the high water mark of liberalism. Southerner hate, I guess.

    As I’ve written before on these threads, politics in Massachusetts will never return to sanity until the last Irishman who grew up in Southie/Dot/Charlestown in the Fifties and Sixties with photos of JFK, Cardinal Cushing and the Pope on the mantel has gone to his long reward.

  172. @tbraton
    I only saw "Are You Being Served?" every now and then on reruns on PBS, but I agree with you. The episodes I watched were pretty funny. Old fashioned and certainly not PC (I'm thinking of the blatantly homosexual sales clerk, the purple-haired sales woman, and the openly lecherous owner), but certainly funny. I believe a number of professional comedians have remarked how PC on college campuses have pretty much ruined stand up comedy in those venues. I think that is one of the reasons why Donald Trump is doing so well in the polls. He is very funny and certainly not politically correct. BTW check out Mark Steyn's latest piece on Trump's appearance in Bernie Sanders' Vermont that I caught on RCP this morning. Very astute and very funny in its own right. http://www.steynonline.com/7408/notes-on-a-phenomenon

    The episodes I watched were pretty funny. Old fashioned and certainly not PC (I’m thinking of the blatantly homosexual sales clerk, the purple-haired sales woman, and the openly lecherous owner), but certainly funny.

    Don’t mistake being Politically Incorrect for being funny.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    The term PC was not even in use then.
    , @tbraton
    "Don’t mistake being Politically Incorrect for being funny."

    Oh, I don't. On the other hand, I still laugh at a well-crafted joke if it's funny, no matter how Politically Incorrect it may be. Somehow I get the feeling you don't. You probably let the "Politically Incorrectness" of a joke determine whether you laugh at it or not. In that way, you are sort of like the teenage Muslim girls in Germany in the video that another poster posted on unz.com this morning expressing disgust at the Germans' love of eating pork. Well, I eat pork because it tastes good, and I don't have any religious scruples forbidding me to eat it.
  173. @Anonymous
    'On the Buses' was the biggest grossing British movie of 1971, out grossing even 'Diamonds are Forever' despite costing only the merest fraction of the budget.

    The film was a spinoff from a popular TV sitcom - a common practice in Britain at that time.
    As I said the film is absolutely hilarious, but I doubt that it has ever been screened in the USA.
    Critics and feminists absolutely hate, hate, hate the film - and still do, and rather harshly always give it an extremely low ranking, despite its massive and lasting popularity.

    Strange as it might seem, in my opinion, the film gives probably the best and most accurate portrayal of the realities of British working class life, in the 1960s and 70s, that you'll ever likely to see anywhere.

    I believe the sitcom and the film have been shown in Australia, where it is extremely popular.
    Apparently a DJ over there specialises in 'Blakey' impersonations.

    I believe the sitcom and the film have been shown in Australia, where it is extremely popular.
    Apparently a DJ over there specialises in ‘Blakey’ impersonations.

    Popularity in Australia is not always a sign of quality. Cf Neighbours….

  174. @Steve Sailer
    A lot of foreign hits that never get released in the U.S. are comedies of working class humor.

    A lot of foreign hits that never get released in the U.S. are comedies of working class humor.

    It’s always interesting to note which comedy shows do well abroad. For example, The Phil Silvers Show was enormously popular in the UK:

    The series was shown weekly on BBC Television during its original run from 20 April 1957 onwards, in varying timeslots, with the final first run episode “Weekend Colonel” airing on 15 January 1961.[8] ITV also screened repeats of the series in most regions throughout the 60s, The series returned in repeats on BBC Television (later BBC One) from June 1961 to March 1967, after which it was absent from the screen until April 1973, when it returned in a late night timeslot, becoming a staple of BBC One’s post-11pm late-night schedule throughout the 70s and 80s, usually appearing immediately prior to the channel’s signoff (before BBC1 became a 24-hour broadcaster in November 1997). In recognition of the series’ consistent popularity, it was moved to an early evening timeslot on BBC2, commencing a repeat run of all four series in broadcast order from 7 November 1984. This repeat run continued through to 22 November 1991, at which point the BBC had screened all available episodes. Episodes continued to be shown, although no longer in their original broadcast order, from 1993 to 2004, with the BBC’s last broadcast episode “Bilko and the Flying Saucers” appearing on 5 November 2004.[8] It is currently being screened on Forces TV.

    The popularity of the program was underlined when the UK publication Radio Times Guide to Comedy ranked The Phil Silvers Show as its top TV sitcom.[9]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Phil_Silvers_Show#UK_reception

  175. @syonredux

    The episodes I watched were pretty funny. Old fashioned and certainly not PC (I’m thinking of the blatantly homosexual sales clerk, the purple-haired sales woman, and the openly lecherous owner), but certainly funny.
     
    Don't mistake being Politically Incorrect for being funny.

    The term PC was not even in use then.

  176. @syonredux

    The episodes I watched were pretty funny. Old fashioned and certainly not PC (I’m thinking of the blatantly homosexual sales clerk, the purple-haired sales woman, and the openly lecherous owner), but certainly funny.
     
    Don't mistake being Politically Incorrect for being funny.

    “Don’t mistake being Politically Incorrect for being funny.”

    Oh, I don’t. On the other hand, I still laugh at a well-crafted joke if it’s funny, no matter how Politically Incorrect it may be. Somehow I get the feeling you don’t. You probably let the “Politically Incorrectness” of a joke determine whether you laugh at it or not. In that way, you are sort of like the teenage Muslim girls in Germany in the video that another poster posted on unz.com this morning expressing disgust at the Germans’ love of eating pork. Well, I eat pork because it tastes good, and I don’t have any religious scruples forbidding me to eat it.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
How a Young Syndicate Lawyer from Chicago Earned a Fortune Looting the Property of the Japanese-Americans, then Lived...
Becker update V1.3.2