Making the Most of the ‘Biden Boom’

 

The last two years have not gone well.  Devastating inflation (reducing the wealth of absolutely everybody, rich and especially poor), urban collapse, high interest rates, increasing racial tensions, a European war that threatens WWIII, increasing energy costs, huge drops in the stock market, China invading our airspace (& Taiwan’s airspace) with no consequences, a humanitarian crisis at our southern border, shipping problems, rising crime rates, explosions in suicides and drug overdoses, prominent leaders openly discussing secession, the FBI, CIA, and our military becoming prominent partisan actors in our political sphere, and so on and so on and so on and so on and so on…

Republicans are displeased, but this is not surprising.  They didn’t vote for all this to begin with.

It’s the Democrats I wonder about.  Paul Krugman won a Nobel Prize for Economics.  He is not stupid.  When he wrote the above article when Biden was elected, did Mr. Krugman believe it?  Did he really believe that leftism would make America a better place, like it did Venezuela, Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, Cuba, etc? Regardless of whether he believed what he was writing then, what does he think now? Now that he has seen how this turned out, if he were given the chance, would he go back in time and vote for Trump instead of Biden?  If not, why not?  How many people voted for Biden?  How many of them would vote the same way today?  Why?

I’ve heard that there is a growing movement among Democrats who hope that Biden does not run for re-election.  Why, I cannot imagine, since he has been the most productive Democrat president since at least FDR, and probably ever.  He has gotten more Democrat policies enacted in just two years than any other Democrat president has in their entire term.  But still, some Democrats apparently want someone new.

But despite that, and despite all that has happened, I really believe that a huge majority of Democrat voters would not change their vote in 2020, given the chance. Despite all that has happened.

I just don’t understand.

Conservatives have long said that no one could be a leftist unless they were unaware of the events of the 20th century, and unless they had never traveled to a leftist country like Cuba or Venezuela.  But now here we are — all of us up to our necks in the results of leftism.  And most leftists seem to stick with leftism.

There’s no way they believe that leftism works — the last two years prove that it does not, just as the 20th century did.

There’s no way they’re simply unaware of the results of applied leftism – they’re living it right now.

So why do they continue to support leftism?  The only possible answer I can think of is so horrifying that I refuse to consider it.

Is this what they want for their children?  Of course not.  But they continue to vote for it?

I just don’t understand.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 94 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    MarciN (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    MarciN (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):
    The U.S. government (or any government, for that matter) is NOT a FIXED-rate borrower (see NOTE below). It is an ADJUSTABLE-rate borrower. That’s why rising interest rates are a problem for it (and, therefore, for US “we the people”).

    My understanding is that most Treasury bonds are fixed rate:

    We sell Treasury Bonds for a term of either 20 or 30 years.

    Bonds pay a fixed rate of interest every six months until they mature.

    You can hold a bond until it matures or sell it before it matures.

    There are some new ones that are variable. I don’t remember what they are called. Perhaps that’s what you are referring to.

    All of the T-bills are more or less variable, because they come up for renewal occasionally, and since they can’t be paid back – the money isn’t available – they get re-sold/rolled over at whatever the current rate is.

    The ones I’m recalling were sort of like variable-rate mortgages. The interest rate changed but at set and fixed intervals. I’ve forgotten the name of them. And perhaps they were a short-lived experiment.

    I saw something that I-Bonds, whatever those are, were recently at 9.62%.

    • #91
  2. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    kedavis (View Comment):

    If they weren’t selling longer-term bonds between 2015 and 2020 it would seem to mean that nobody was willing to buy them.  Not that they didn’t try to sell them.

    And remember too, they can’t NOT sell the bonds.

    I’m ignorant on this stuff, but an inability to sell bonds is exactly what drives a rise in yields.  “Trying” equals raising rates.  

    • #92
  3. GPentelie Coolidge
    GPentelie
    @GPentelie

    kedavis (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    GPentelie (View Comment):

    MarciN (View Comment):
    My understanding is that most Treasury bonds are fixed rate:

    NOT just most. It’s ALL. EACH individual Treasury bill, note, and bond issued by the US Treasury does indeed have a FIXED rate.

    But only for whatever their term is, which for the big government bonds like they sell to big banks or to China, might be as little as 1 year or even 90 days.

    Exactly.

    It would have been so nice if the “best and brightest” at Treasury would have extended the maturity of the debt, and locked in the low rates when, say, 30-year bonds were at 1.5-2.0%.

    But noooooo …

    Sometimes they try to extend the duration, but then they may not get bought, if buyers are concerned about higher inflation to come. It can be the same thing now, they might not be able to sell long-term bonds even at 7% if there is concern that inflation might soon reach 9% or more.

    Very true, in regards to the current situation. The situation between 2015 and 2020, however, was quite different. In the absence of inflation concerns then, demand was robust even at those low rates. Missed opportunity, alas.

    I’ve read/heard, although I suppose it may not be true, that the Treasury Dept tries to get the longest terms possible for bond sales, but they have to make adjustments for what buyers will actually accept. If they weren’t selling longer-term bonds between 2015 and 2020 it would seem to mean that nobody was willing to buy them. Not that they didn’t try to sell them.

    And remember too, they can’t NOT sell the bonds.

    Oh, the demand was there. I can say that with confidence based on my 35 year career in the financial derivatives business (much of which was on the fixed income side), from which I had retired just before the time period I mentioned. At a time when short and medium maturity notes were yielding nearly imperceptible returns, a 2% return the inflation risk of which domestic and international financial institutions would have had no trouble hedging against was manna from heaven. The Treasury would have had to issue a monstrous amount of 30-year bonds before the market cried “Uncle!” and demanded higher rates.

    • #93
  4. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    BDB (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    If they weren’t selling longer-term bonds between 2015 and 2020 it would seem to mean that nobody was willing to buy them. Not that they didn’t try to sell them.

    And remember too, they can’t NOT sell the bonds.

    I’m ignorant on this stuff, but an inability to sell bonds is exactly what drives a rise in yields. “Trying” equals raising rates.

    Raising rates, and/or shortening terms.

    • #94
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.