Victor Davis Hanson Questions Obama’s Political Past


Published on Oct 31, 2008

SUBSCRIBE 105K
Complete video at: http://fora.tv/2008/10/20/Victor_Davi… Conservative columnist and Hoover Institution Senior Fellow Victor Davis Hanson discusses several accusations regarding Barack Obama’s political career. —– Victor Davis Hanson discusses Obama, Palin, and the Culture Wars. This event was part of the Hoover Institution’s Fall Retreat 2008. Victor Davis Hanson is a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, a professor emeritus at California University, Fresno, and a nationally syndicated columnist for Tribune Media Services. He is also the Wayne & Marcia Buske Distinguished Fellow in History, Hillsdale College, where he teaches each fall courses in military history and classical culture. He was a full-time farmer before joining CSU Fresno, in 1984 to initiate a classics program. In 1991, he was awarded an American Philological Association Excellence in Teaching Award, which is given yearly to the country’s top undergraduate teachers of Greek and Latin. Hanson has written for the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Los Angeles Times, International Herald Tribune, New York Post, National Review, Washington Times, Commentary, The New Republic, Claremont Review of Books, American Heritage, Policy Review, Wilson Quarterly, Weekly Standard, Daily Telegraph, and has been interviewed often on National Public Radio, PBS Newshour, the Hugh Hewitt Show, and C-Span’s BookTV. He serves on the editorial board of Arion, the Military History Quarterly, and City Journal. Since 2001, has written a weekly column for National Review Online, and in 2004, began his syndicated column for Tribune Media Services. In 2006, he began writing a blog for Pajamas Media, Works and Days.

SHOW MORE

QE & Its Failure


QUESTION: Dear Martin,
During WEC in Rome I came to understand that the issue with QE is that it did not create any inflation in the USA. On the other hand, as you mentioned the inflation is being calculated in a different way that it used to be in the future. How come then the US does not just change the way of calculating the inflation in a way which would show it’s there? Wouldn’t that be an easier way than to do more QEs?
Thank you,

MK

ANSWER: The primary reason QE fails is because the economy is global. Central banks can no longer manage the economy, for the money does not remain in isolation. Additionally, as I pointed out in Rome, they may have negative interest rates, but that does not pass through. You cannot borrow money from a bank at negative rates.

The Threat of Protectionism


QUESTION: Marty:

I read you every day and I am one of the fortunate people to have a financial advisor that attends your Conference every year in the US.

I am wondering how Airbus will be affected in the future as the Euro further declines.

Thanks, RM

ANSWER: This is one of the aspects that caused the protectionism during the 1930s. As the turmoil in Europe unfolded, capital fled to the dollar pushing it higher. This invoked protectionism also propelled by the decline in commodity prices. The protectionism began with the agricultural sector and then spread to other areas.

As the dollar is pushed higher, we will see protectionism rise again probably 2021-2022. European companies that do not have professional hedging departments will suffer greatly.

Moving from QE to Just Monetizing Government


QUESTION: Mr, Armstrong; Why the push for lower interest rates again in developed markets? You have stated the QE has been a total failure. Are they incapable of doing anything else?

KE

ANSWER: We are switching from QE to a new reality of budget management. If interest rates rise on government bonds, the budget blows out. At this stage, the Fed is toying with the idea of setting benchmark rates for 2 to 10-year instruments. This will be different than QE. It will be the collapse of government bond markets on a global scale.

ETF v Mutual Fund


QUESTION: Are ETFs really better than a mutual fund for tax purposes?

HS

ANSWER: The primary difference between mutual funds and ETFs (exchange-traded funds) is that while an open-end mutual fund is priced once based upon the market closing, ETFs as well as a closed-end mutual funds trade all day. This actually goes back to the Panic of 1966 when mutual funds were open-ended but traded on the exchange and were bid up and down based on emotion rather than net asset value. The crash took place because mutual funds were at times selling well above net asset value.

If we look at the reforms post-1966, investors in mutual funds buy or sell them directly from the mutual-fund companies themselves. That creates a different tax structure than an ETF in which purchases go to the market and the ETF is simply created by purchasing the underlying basket.

Mutual funds and most ETFs are governed by the Investment Company Act of 1940. Therefore, this legislation treats them like a pass-through company. When a mutual-fund investor wants to sell, the fund sells shares of appreciated stock to generate cash which creates a taxable capital gain. Since most funds operate as simple pass-through vehicles, those tax liabilities from the gains accrue to all investors in the fund including those who have not sold any holding.

ETFs actually do avoid that type of tax issue. ETFs are not direct buyers or sellers of shares as a mutual fund. The ETF is created by a market maker with a special contract with the ETF provider. The investor has the newly created ETF share which is created by purchasing all of the holdings in the underlying ETF. This basket of shares is given to the ETF issuer thereby creating the ETF shares.

Because an ETF is not a direct buyer of the underlying shares as in a mutual fund, the ETF itself is not a buyer or seller. The basket of shares are swapped and are therefore in-kind transactions, thus there is no pass-through capital-gains tax bill. This is the tax advantage of an ETF over a mutual fund.