666 Larry Kudlow’s …Paper Tiger

Monday, November  29th, 2010

Earlier tonight, Larry Kudlow …the moderator-host of CNBC’s primetime “The Kudlow Report” made a comment in which he used  the term “paper tiger” in drawing an analogy between the U.S. response to China’s rather cavalier lack of will to chide North Korea for its shelling of a South Korean Island last week.

In this, Larry stated that it was his  hopes that America would not become a paper tiger.

To this …I say; it is too late to hope in one hand and wish in another.

The fact of the matter is, America has become and now is …your “paper tiger.”

And in looking back into my files, I found a piece I wrote which addresses our diminished ability to support our allies in Asia in view of America’s willingness to mortgage Her sovereign independence with Her indebtedness to China …in Her sick reliance upon Chinese credit.

Asian debt is not in America’s best interests.

Asian debt is a direct threat …not only to America’s independence …but also poses a threat to the health of Her global relationships with Her allies ….

To this end, on June 6th 2006 I wrote the following piece:

Tuesday, June 06, 2006  

( 6 – 6 – 06 )

Dear Editors,

In light of President Bush’s recent appointment of Mr. Paulsen  as Secretary of the Treasury, there has been no small speculation that this move (in a large part) was based upon an apparent  need to place more pressure upon China to float its currency …allowing it  to rise  against other currency valuations in a fair market manner.

As an after thought, making Paulsen Secretary of the Treasury was a move   which the president, most likely made  so as to  leverage Paulsen’s vast financial experience,  far reaching contacts and broad, wide-spread tiess in the world of finance. Paulsen  had developed tallents which would well serve to efficiently market treasuries at a time of ever rising dependency upon the need for auctions to come off successfully without a hitch. And as Treasury Secretary, Paulsen had accumulated quite a good deal of valuable experience while working at Goldman Sacks. Paulsen’s dealings with securities  would make a valuable highly sought after addition to the president’s cabinet.

 All  speculation aside, despite all that the shaking and moving this administration seems to be engaged in,  I have  to ask; what  truthfully is shaping and affecting  the administration’s China policies and actions?

This  question  begs still another question.  How committed to our own relative national interests are we as a free democratic people?

 Are we  not still a sovereign nation?

Then why do not our national interests reflect this with regard to our habits of over spending and those of over barrowing? Why do these routines seemingly stand in direct conflict with our  international foreign policies in ways which portend to more than suggest that America is rather more in favor of economic globalization than  looking out for Her sovereign interests?

If Washington’s message  is so urgent …so as to be  deserving  of  more than mere political lip-service,  then, why do  we continue  in  the same laughable and ineffective currency (weak dollar monetary) policies which favor  China?

If the Chinese  are not willing to play ball in their refusal to float their currency valuations (exchange rates) using  generally accepted international practices, why not  adopt a plan to gradually implement  an escalating  program of systematic  tariffs until they are willing to play fair?

 (Soon hereafter …there actually was a tarrif placed on imported Chinese  printed glossy paper products. Week play …paper tiger? Howbeit, it still was  a play!)

In other words, rather than continue in  laughable,  ineffective,  adverse  policies, and playing with an unfair player whose play is detrimentally  affecting us nationally; …why not instead provide the Chinese with motivations which place a goodly portion of forced reason for  plain fair play?

In other words, give the Chinese  motives  to make them want to participate internationally in good spirit.

Why can not Washington confidently  place  our own Homeland and national economic interests on equal ground, if not higher  than the interests and issues surrounding  Taiwan and Korea?  

Could it be that our leadership is  afraid of being bullied by a nation who we are becoming more and more dependant upon as a creditor?

Actually, I rather bellieve  that this may already be the case.

Are we …as a nation, not unlike a parent  who has  more than well …spared the rod and spoiled the  child?  

 Have we not  enabled China’s ability to  purchase more and more  of our Treasury Notes and thus buy into our public debt at a greater and greater pace?

As we have barrowed more and more,  is this not, after all, a problem we all have had a hand in making?

As we go into the mid-term elections, it is paramount to elect public servants who will be  willing and able to address these and other issues and thus serve our national and international interests in a perspective of honesty and clarity with an emphasis upon the relative good priorities of our own national interests. We need to be healthy and strong to go forward.

But we need first to be willing to straightforwardly address these issues and avoid the temptations to overshadow the tough issues by sidetracking these issues using  smoke and mirrors to avoid responsibility to the greater good.

A wise man once said, “If, in order to serve  the weak, the strong are made to become weak; who, if at all, is served?”

Hopefully, our choices will reflect an openness which  places an emphasis upon priorities  which best look out for all of our interests here at home while not diminishing  our abilities to look out for our allies  who count on our abilities to react in healthy manners to international issues.

We need to be able to be responsive to crisis from  positions of strength and from  a base of honorable honest leadership.

We must not leave our homeland vulnerable in any weak position of state; …especially not fiscally.

Let us  make  clear  the issues before us as well as where the candidates stand on  these difficult  issues.

Let us not be diverted nor sidetracked for the mere  sake to serve the  need for  power for power’s sake.

Bill Landman