Dennis Kneale Still An Idiot
There was just a segment on CNBC in which Dennis Kneale debated with some other guy on whether or not the tax rebate will ultimately benefit China.
Dennis Kneale, Idiot
The other guy argued that when we just go out and buy stuff that a lot of our dollars are actually headed over to China, since they manufacture everything. He said if we really want to stimulate our economy, we should be investing in infrastructure since most heavy machinery is still manufactured here. In addition, we'd get the added benefit of better infrastructure. No one likes crumbling bridges.
Anyway, Dennis Kneale didn't like that idea. He said "we're looking to lift consumer spending, not US production." He said, "What's the problem? DVDs and flat screens are a good thing to buy! It's good for the economy!" He said that the whole building infrastructure thing was a "depression era argument" and that "building infrastructure that isn't needed is ridiculous."
Then, out of nowhere he said "Just cut taxes!!!"
YAY! So in his world, I'll pay less in taxes so I can have a really sweet home theater and movie collection. That will be good, because I won't want to drive over any bridges or drive on any interstates anymore, since they're all going to shit.
9 comments:
Dude, my hands were balled up into fists and my jaw clenched when he started spouting his nonsense. He was debating someone who was way out of his league, and he sounded like a shrill country-club housewife with his little smirk and his pinched face and his beady little eyes. What a complete idiot.
How can he even say we don't need to make improvements to our infrastructure? And how can he say that this spending won't benefit actual production at home -- does anyone know how much of our construction materials are sourced and manufactured here? I bet it's a lot.
I was thinking to myself, "CNBC, you gotta get rid of this guy because he's making all of you look like assholes." At least the third guest made sense when he disagreed with the public investment idea.
I personally think that infrastructure idea is fantastic, but this isn't for our economy, after all. It's for the parties, right? Deep down, that's what all those fucks are thinking. Get the sheep into the corral. Tell them anything! And then when they are in the corral, let them eat cake.
Neale is way out of his league on that channel. And so was that dumbass of a host -- whatever her name was. She and Neale seemed to be having their own little diva party between those two distinguished gentlemen.
And earlier there was Kudlow earlier, doing his little "I love Reagan" monologue in his Gordon Gecko get-up. Fuck CNBC. I can't watch it anymore. It's just too painful.
Two things...
1. I love Melissa Francis
2. About Kudlow earlier... the amazing thing is that the "guest panel" was Kudlow, Dick Armey, and Steve Forbes!
Fair and balanced? I think not. Unless they introduced the panel as "far right" loonies, but I don't think they did. Either way, I wouldn't know, I had the TV muted. Perhaps they feel they still need to compete with FBN... I dunno.
-DT
I can just see Kudlow's face, red-veined and clammy, as if he's just run a 5k, his little knoby white knees all tangled up in his suspenders. He's slicking his hair back after bending over little Melissa in the utility closet. You know, the one in back of the media room. She looks like she just ate a canary.
What? You mean they were getting brooms or something? From the utility closet?
I bet they have enough money to have janitors and stuff, over at CNBC.
-DT
DT: i see u have your own clothing line
http://www.generationq.net/articles/GenerationQnet-welcomes-DT-Clothes!-00001.html
Regarding all of the current "Kneale is an idiot" blogger outcries, let me say this:
CNBC's Kneale is an exceptionally bright, well educated guy whose credentials are without question. I know this because I grew up with him, went to high school with him, and went to college with him, where we shared a healthy rivalry chasing each others girlfriends.
I suspect there is a method to his madness and his seemingly inane optimism in a miserable economic environment, a reason for his confrontational, no holds barred manner. It’s his job to agitate, to spur intense discussion and fire up viewers. And he's damn good at it. If he didn't take a contrary position from the majority, we'd all be watching the "Boring Lunch", rather than the Power Lunch.
But, being "Jack Mounteer the Commercial Banker", not "Dennis's Buddy, Jack", I have to chime in on the dissent regarding a couple of his recently published economic opinions. Dennis, you're my old friend, so I have to tell it to you straight. I read some of your stuff and watched some of the yackety-yack on CNBC. You, my favorite national TV personality, are either smoking a giant bong filled with hashish, or indulging yourself by taking a contrary "Things Aren't That Bad" position for the sake of firing us all up.
Take it from a guy who is in the trenches everyday meeting with small and medium-sized business owners and borrowers. Things suck bad. I mean, really really suck large. A sucking so enormous as to create a huge vacuum of space devoid of any upside for the foreseeable future. Revenues are way down for almost every business owner I know. Some by 60%. Many are hanging on by a thread, slashing overhead to the bone, and praying for the consumer to emerge from his funk.
Here is the problem. The consumer cannot emerge from his funk. His lack of spending is not by choice. The banks can no longer make home equity loans, because people are now poor. Most people's biggest asset (their house) is now worth less than the total balance of their mortgage loan and home equity loan. Their net worth has plummeted, and now may even be negative, because the value of their largest asset has plummeted.
And so, people are tapped out. The spending orgy of the last 5 or 6 years, fueled almost entirely by cash obtained by leveraging their wildly appreciating home, is over. PERMANENTLY OVER. There is nowhere for them to go for money. They must now live within the limits of their disposable income. What a bummer. And the loan defaults will grow in number as values continue to fall, regardless if the current spurt in the numbers is due primarily to increased delays (days late) in payments on loans already in default.
And so, the market is not fundamentally too low due to investor fear as you claim. The market is low because investors know what is coming. The low P/E ratios and exceptional dividend ratios of today are based on historical earnings. Earnings that will not be realized again anytime soon because: 1) consumer spending has fallen, is falling, and will continue to remain flat or fall. 2) Companies can no longer enhance profitability by means of inexpensive leverage and low costs of capital. Profits are down, permanently down, and falling further.
It does not take a Nobel winning economist to see this. It is pretty simple, really.
And investors are fleeing from financials and bank stocks for good reason. I compete with these failing banks every day. I see how they are behaving on the front lines. They are in serious trouble. They have insufficient capital. They cannot make loans because of it. They are hoarding cash to cover future liabilities.
As these financial institutions come back again and again to the well, and the U.S. Government comes to own a larger and larger chunk of these institutions, the common stock owners will be left in the cold. No smart investor wants to take on that risk. That is why their stock values have plummeted. There is no recovery for them in sight.
So, Dennis, I really don't think you believe all of your own banter. Instead, I see your true intent, and commend you on your very successful strategy of becoming a household name, of stirring the pot. Without your lively controversial approach, we'd all be yawning, or worse, just crying. I am speculating there is a method to your madness. As my Daddy said to me when I was a young man, "Son, it doesn't matter whether they are talkin' good or bad about you, as long as they are talkin' about you".
Jack,
I appreciate your well thought out comment (which I see doubles as a blog entry on your blog "Dennis Kneale Is Not An Idiot").
And all of it makes a lot of sense, except for one thing... you don't prove to me AT ALL that Dennis Kneale is not an idiot.
If he accepted a job to act as a right wing whine/noise machine dude even though this isn't truly how he feels, than he's an idiot.
And as for people tuning in to hear some of the crap he spews, like the crap I point out in this post, that it'd be better to spend our money on flat screens to support the economy rather than invest tax dollars in something that would benefit our country in the long term, I just don't believe it.
Based on anecdotes I read on the internet, and from the guys in my office, it sounds like everyone is tired of this dude.
People watching TV don't need to have their emotions stirred by fear and crap. That's why FOX exists... let them get it there. And if your buddy Dennis wants to be a right-wing hack, there's probably a spot for him there if he's doing so much to pull in viewers.
CNBC should be a serious channel devoted to financial news and reporting. Perhaps if they stuck to that idea, people wouldn't be so confused by the current crisis, what caused it, and what's coming.
-DT
Given your comments on FOX, my guess is you voted for Obama. (So did I).
I must admit that CNBC is getting a little out of hand with all the mud-slinging and petty rivalry. Sometimes the arguing and interrupting get so intense, I can't even make out what anybody is saying.
But the female broadcasters are so damn hot that I just can't turn 'em off.
I have to agree with you that Dennis is way off on his flat screen TV remark. If the gov't gives a taxpayer a dollar, and that consumer goes and buys a flat screen TV, then the economy get's a dollar's worth of bang for the buck. But, if the government spends the dollar itself rather than giving it to the taxpayer (and it matters not whether they spend it on roads, bridges, widgets, or whatever), then the economy will effectively get a $1.20 or $1.30 worth of bang for the buck, due to the multiplier effect.
This is very basic, well-known, good old fashioned, Keynesian economics we have all observed over the last couple of centuries.
The only risk to this strategy is that when the economy finally comes around, if the Fed can't pull enough of the funny money back in to avoid money supply growth far surpassing growth in GDP, then we are all in store for some pretty serious inflation and rising interest rates.
Add to that the resulting possibility of a loss in foreign investor faith in the dollar and you have even faster rising interest rates and an escalating cost to the gov't of its huge burgeoning accumulated deficit, creating an even worse mess.
So, Once again, I find myself disagreeing with the on-air comments of my good buddy Dennis.
Contrary to Dennis's claimed position; 1) Don't give the money directly to the consumer, and 2) Take off the rose-tinted glasses.
That said, though, if you ever had the chance to speak with Dennis one on one, you'd find him(surpisingly perhaps) extremely articulate, and well informed, with a firm grasp of finance and economics. That might be hard for you to believe in observation of some of his on-air antics, but it's absolutely true.
Still, my advice to Dennis is to lose the spiked hairdo and grow a goatee, take some lessons in voice pitch moderation, and pop a valium or two before each show.
Post a Comment