Fibbing With GM Job Creation Statistics, Bill Clinton Edition

From Bill Clinton‘s Democratic National Convention speech, September 5, 2012

“Now there are 250,000 more people working in the auto industry than the day the companies were restructured. Governor Romney opposed the plan to save GM and Chrysler. So here’s another jobs score: Obama two hundred and fifty thousand, Romney, zero.” Wild applause.
Clinton attributes the 250,000 new jobs created to domestic and foreign auto manufacturers, parts suppliers, and dealers located in the United States to the Obama-directed bankruptcy of General Motors. Without the President’s bold and decisive action, these quarter million new jobs would not exist, and U.S. manufacturing would not have been “saved.”

Clinton gets his figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which shows that U.S. auto manufacturers (both domestic and foreign owned) employed 624,400 at the time of the bankruptcy (June 2009) and now employ 789,500 — an increase of 165,100 jobs. Auto dealers employed 1,009,700 in June 2009 and 1,081,200 today — a gain of 71,500 jobs.  The two gains add up to 236,600 jobs (Clinton’s 250,000).
Sorry, President Clinton. There is no way you can you attribute the 236,600 job gain to the General Motors bailout. According to the carmaker’s annual report, GM North America employed 70,000 in the United States in June of 2009 (the rest were in Canada and Mexico) and 74,500 today, for a net gain of 4,500 jobs. Of the auto manufacturing job increases, GM accounts for only two percent.

go to forbes.com

World Economists Confirm America’s Decline under Obama

U.S. voters are being barraged by claims and counter claims of how many jobs were lost or created under the Obama administration, did the Detroit bailout hurt or help, and whether Obama or  Republican stonewalling are to blame for the feeble recovery. This partisan din kicks up a huge cloud of dust as self-appointed “independent fact checkers” and “nonpartisan” think tanks contradict each other. Large numbers of economists, some prominent and others less so, line up on both sides. Pity the harried undecided voters in search of non-partisan information.

American voters could well look above our political fray to the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Index (GCI).  Every year starting in 2004, the GCI ranks the world economies by their “competitiveness,” defined as “the set of institutions, policies, and factors that determine the level of productivity of a country,” which, in turn, determines “the level of prosperity that can be earned by an economy.”

Throughout most of its short history, the GCI ranked the United States first or second. At times, Switzerland, Finland, Singapore, Denmark, and Finland have given the U.S. a run for its money.

The GCI, to its credit, addresses what should be the core issue of any political debate in any country: How well have country leaders managed the economic and political institutions that create prosperity and growth? Obama should be re-elected or “let go” depending on how American voters evaluate his stewardship of America’s political and economic institutions.

The World Economic Forum’s motto is: “Committed to Improving the State of the World.” Its annual winter meeting in Davos, Switzerland  attracts the world’s jet-setting political, business, and intellectual glitterati as they discuss issues de jure -- the world economy, health and HIV, climate change, and globalization. Presidents, prime ministers, central bankers, queens and parliamentary/congressional notables rub shoulders with Bill Gates, Russian oligarchs, Henry Kissinger, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, and Kofi Annan.

Barack Obama fits the intellectual, cosmopolitan, and global profile of the World Economic Forum to a T. A GCI conclusion that U.S. political and economic institutions deteriorated under Obama’s stewardship could not be spun as partisan by Obama’s spin masters.

go to forbes.com

On the Failed Job Creation Front, Obama Has Completely Run Out of Ideas

Unemployment is the millstone around President Obama’s neck in the 2012 election campaign. Attentive voters understand he is offering excuses — a worse-than-expected economy, financial crises requiring longer recoveries, bad luck of tsunamis, droughts, and the Euro — not solutions. Obama cannot deliver solutions because a real jobs program contradicts his core principles, alienates his base, and infuriates his crony contributors. He can only promise more of the failed policies –stimulus and tinkering — of his first three and a half years
.
Obama’s last foray into job creation was his American Jobs Act (AJA) submitted to Congress on September 12, 2011.  Labeled “Stimulus 2” by its critics, Obama’s shopworn list of remedies, promised to “put more people back to work and put more money in the pockets of working Americans….without adding a dime to the deficit.” The AJA’s temporary tax credits to businesses that hire, extension of the payroll tax holiday, and more money for teachers and infrastructure stalled in both Houses and had to be taken up piecemeal.  The payroll tax holiday extension passed Congress. Small businesses decided his tax credits for hiring were not worth the trouble.

A deafening silence followed.  Obama’s vaunted Jobs Task Force has not met for more than a half year. Obama is out of ideas. He can only offer excuses, criticize those offering new solutions, and divert attention from the worst recovery in history with chatter about the rich not paying their fair share and his opponent’s tax returns.

One year ago, on the eve of the President’s jobs address, I wrote Why Obama Cannot Support a Real Jobs Program.  In this piece, I showed what a real jobs program looks like and how it largely would have increased jobs, to use Obama’s AJA message, “without adding a dime to the deficit.” Here is the substance of what I wrote then as advice to the President:

go to forbes.com

New Business for American Trial Lawyers: Sue For Hurt Feelings

Nine Russian activists are suing Madonna for millions. They were offended by her support of  homosexual rights  during a concert in Petersburg. A February Petersburg law makes it illegal “to promote homosexuality to minors” and reportedly there were children as young as nine at the Madonna concert. They are demanding $10.5 million in damages.

Madonna is not the only one. Three residents of Novosibirsk are suing the jailed Pussy Riot Punk Rock girls for 30,000 rubles  (about a thousand dollars) for hurt feelings caused by the punk rockers behavior in a Moscow cathedral.

U. S. lawyers: get on a plane to Russia. Maybe you can learn how to sue for hurt feelings in the United States where big bucks are at stake.

Storm Clouds Ahead for Putin as He Takes on McCartney, Madonna and the LGBT Community

Virtually the whole world now knows that three girls wearing colorful mini-skirts, tights and masks were arrested in a Moscow cathedral for performing a punk prayer: “Holy Virgin: Drive Putin Out.” After a half year in jail, undernourished and sleep-deprived, the three Pussy Riot feminist punk band girls were sentenced to two years in jail for “hooliganism motivated by religious hatred.”  The judge refused to allow testimony that their’s  was a political act aimed at Putin and the corrupt head of the orthodox church, Patriarch Kirill (widely known to have been a KGB agent during the Soviet era). The girls maintained they acted against Putin and Kirill, not against the church.

A new term is now ensconced in the Russian vocabulary – “khamsud”. Both the Pussy Riot and oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky trials were held in Moscow’s Khamovnichesky Court.  Khamsud, roughly translated, is a court run by dishonest judges and prosecutors.

The harsh sentence to two years in a labor colony shook the world diplomatic and artistic communities, but prison terms are an integral part of Putin’s strategy of  attacking “low hanging fruit” to show  that dissent will not be tolerated. Putin sentenced  Khodorkovsky, not once but twice, in  “khamsud.” Other oligarchs were silenced or fled the country. But Khodorkovsky was one of those crooked oligarchs, people concluded and paid no attention. Similarly, Putin calculates that few Russians will care about bizarre punk rockers, whose short skirts revealed their rears as they genuflected on the church altar.


go to forbes.com

An Open Letter to Vladimir Putin on Pussy Riot: Gregory Kataev (film and theatric director, Moscow)

Dear Paul,

I recently returned from France where my sister organized a musical festival.  An excellent group of international musicians and students from the French conservatories participated, with each concert being an event unto itself.  People from all over the globe were in attendance – friends, acquaintances, and strangers.

I was inundated by questions about why the girls from Pussy Riot were in prison.  A high ranking diplomat told me bluntly if the girls had danced on the altar of Notre Dame they would be sentenced to a fine or, barring payment, a week of public service.  It would never have occurred to anyone that girls who caused no physical harm or material damage to the church could be in prison.  Their punishment is purely political, he declared.

Others were equally incredulous:  A Belgian burst out:  “What is your court doing?  Not everyone approves of what they did, but the legal process produces nothing but a feeling of disgust!  The whole world is indignant about this inquisition, and the names “Nadia-Masha-Katya” now are symbols of political repression.”  An American complained to me:  “I admire Russian literature, music and the churches.  But the shameful stories about the Patriarch’s 40 thousand dollars Breguette watches and his self-serving apartment law suit case and the shameful trial of Pussy Riot have caused a general loathing of Russia around the world.  More and more people view Russia as a totalitarian, abnormal state with a medieval mentality.  Who can give credence to Putin’s ludicrous statements about democracy, rule of law, and the creation of favorable social and business climate?”

What could I possibly answer as someone who loves his country but completely shares this outrage?

Pussy Riot adds to the too many Russian trials over the last few years that have caused terrifying reputational damage to Russia.  No real or imagined CIA campaign could cause such psychological or ideological harm to the Russian image as this trial. The Patriarch’s silence is shameful.  The cowardly, Pontius-Pilate  Putin’s position, when he washes his hands of the case demonstrating that he has nothing to do with the show trial,  evokes even more international shame.  Civilized countries cannot remain indifferent to such abuses.

A friend invited two wives of Russian billionaires to the music festival.  At the end of the second day, during the final part of the concert, two young women entered the packed concert hall after ***knocking on the door.  They were met with scathing glances and they remained standing near the door, their expressions assured, if not haughty.  I found myself near them, and couldn’t resist asking if they were Russian.  They both proudly responded yes, but obviously took offense at the question.  I took note of their magnificently varnished nails and expensive clothes.

 After the performance, I told my friend not to bother introducing me to the two young women. I didn’t like them and didn’t want to meet them.  Regardless, after 15 minutes of subtle maneuvers through the crowd, my friend tapped my shoulder and introduced them.  They announced that they were both Natashas (or Svetas - I forgot) and that according to the Russian tradition I could stand between them and make a wish.  I stood between them and said that I wished the girls of Pussy Riot to be freed!  Another young Russian woman in their entourage exclaimed, “But why should they be released?!”  As I was trying to explain my position, she shook her head and covered her face with her hands, once again loudly exclaiming, “No, there was a cross, it was a sacred place, you can’t do such things there!  They are criminals and should be judged as such!”  The billionaires’ wives nodded agreement while smiling at me at the same time.  Their friend and I continued to argue, attracting distasteful glances from those who heard what was going on. After I slipped away, a vacuum formed around the billionaire’s wives’ group, and they quickly disappeared.

After returning to Moscow, I now suspect that too many Russians share the views of  the tackily but expensively adorned billionaires’ wives.  I read the comment sections of the press on Pussy Riot, and I see Russia itself.  These are not Europeans or Americans commenting, but Russians, with an almost childlike or fairy tale interpretation of the controversy, expressed primitively and agressivly.  Any intelligent discussion elicits vicious responses and these opinions continue to safely hover on the internet.  They cannot merely be explained away as nonsense and political naiveté. The only explanation I can come up with is the indulgence of the Russian intelligence services. The same story with the numerous illegal surveillance recordings of the Russian opposition on the internet. 

In any country that respects its own laws the publication of private information gathered illegally on regime opponents would cause a hurricane of indignation in the media, followed by criminal trials of  those responsible.  But in Russia, only starkly unjust criminal trials are initiated against  the political opposition and now the innocent girls of Pussy Riot.  But the outside world perfectly understands what is going on.  And morning, as the Russian song says, will eventually come.

Mr. Putin, you should pay attention to what the international community is saying - the words and deeds (or lack thereof) of  the church make it clear that Patriarch Kirill is your  puppet (or at least trying to be one).  Either you are not a very smart person, Mr. Putin, or it is your advisors (which does not preclude the first option). People are discussing this in every corner of the world… Paris, Orleans, Lyon, London, Edinburgh, Rome, Florence, Venice, Brussels, Antwerp, Amsterdam, the Hague, Washington, New York and most importantly…in Moscow.  And I, and the millions of others who love Russia and her culture, are terrified by the Pussy Riot process, along with the other unjust and shameful legal situations in Russia.  I urge you to speak in support of the girls from Pussy Riot, Mr. Putin.

Imagine how your prestige and authority (and that of the Russian Orthodox Church) would rise if you (or Patriarch Kirill) publicly denounce the charges against Pussy Riot.  The group acted in bad taste and offended parishioners, but they did not cause harm to any people or icons. These girls, whatever they are -  our children, we forgive them; we love them and would like to meet with them in order to explain something.  Imagine the shattering impression this would make on people around the world.  This would be similar to Pope John Paul II meeting with the Turk who had shot him in order to forgive him.  This was the event of the year, but I don’t urge you in order to follow a Roman Pope.  I urge you to switch on your mind (and your heart, if it still switches on) for the glory of Christianity,  the glory of the historical confessors of Orthodoxy - in the glory of Russia.

If you cannot do this, the impression will be justified that you have no spiritual  values and that  the president of Russia has only his own self-serving calculations and political interests at heart.  But, it seems to me that you will say nothing.  And it seems that you will craftily continue to refer Pussy Riot  back to the Russian Courts and await  “ their” decision.  You are crafty because this was the same position you took during the Khodorkovsky trials while at the same time you unsubstantially accused him of being up to his elbows in blood and applied pressure to the courts.  This is unfair and illegal.  And while you are the Egyptian Pharaoh of Russia you are beyond the law. 

But things can change. And I hope they will. And how will Russian history remember you?  Will you be remembered as the one who created self-destructing “vertical” of  power, primitive “manual control” and whose throne was propped up by the oil, gas and lumber that are the national resources of  the entire country?  Will you be also remembered as the one under whose name, with your consent, citizens were pursued, judged and sentenced as if Russian justice is  a medieval inquisition?  Just imagine what future school children and students will read about you in their textbooks in fifty years from now?  Or a hundred?  In your place, or that of Patriarch Kirill, I would feel fear and shame.