The editors of the Wall Street Journal aren’t impressed with President Obama’s 2015 budget:

Mr. Obama’s budget doesn’t make even a token outreach to the GOP, and in that regard it is at least honest. With Democrats at risk of losing the Senate, Mr. Obama views a revival of tax and spend as his party’s best 2014 campaign pitch. Americans will have to decide if they like what about half of them will be paying for.

I don’t know that there’s any way to look at it other than as a purely political act, a “red line”, perhaps. The Senate has only passed one budget in the last five years and it didn’t bear a lot of resemblance to the president’s budget for that year. Need I explain what the fate of the president’s budgets has been in the House?

Much is being made of German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s reaction to a phone call with Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin that Putin was “out of touch with reality”:

US reports said Merkel phoned Barack Obama on Sunday evening after speaking to the Russian president to press him to back down from his invasion of Ukraine and occupation of the Crimean peninsula.

“She was not sure he was in touch with reality, people briefed on the call said. ‘In another world,’ she said,” the New York Times reported.

Perhaps a better, more diplomatic, less German way of putting it is that there wasn’t a meeting of minds.

In my view the ideas that President Putin has articulated lately are just the latest expression of ideas that go back well over two hundred years in Russia and, indeed, the entire Slavic world. I might characterize them by saying that national and ethnic identities are alive and well (if that’s the right word for it given European history) in today’s Europe.

Other than the very smallest European countries there are frictions between and among ethnic groups in every one of them. In Spain I’m aware of the Catalans and the Basques but I’m sure there are others. In the United Kingdom there are at least four. In France there are at least six. Even in tiny relatively homogeneous Denmark there are three and in Finland two.

IMO Chancellor Merkel’s version of the European project is one in which national and ethnic identities are subordinated to a common European (read: German) identity.

Who’s crazy?

Bad policies have a way of coming back to bite you. Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin is claiming a right to intervene forcefully in Ukraine as part of a right to protect:

Putin said what had happened in Ukraine was an “anti-constitutional coup and armed seizure of power,” and insisted that ousted Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych is the legitimate leader of the nation.

He also insisted that if Russian-speaking citizens in the east of Ukraine ask for Russia’s help, Russia has the right “to take all measures to protect the rights of those people.”

The parliament in Ukraine is “partly legitimate,” he said, but the country’s acting President is not.

He also insisted that the forces that had seized control of the Crimean Peninsula, whose faces have been covered and whose uniforms were without identifying insignia, were not Russian regulars.

Putin said that there had been no need for the use of Russia’s military so far, with not a shot fired, and that any use of military force would be the last resort. He repeatedly cast any such intervention as a humanitarian mission.

Military action, he said, would be “completely legitimate” because it was at the request of Yanukovych and in line with Russia’s duty to protect people with historic ties to Russia, both cultural and economic.

“Firstly, we have a request of the legitimate President Yanukovych to protect the welfare of the local population. We have neo-Nazis and Nazis and anti-Semites in parts of Ukraine, including Kiev,” Putin said.

Putin also took note of the double standard being applied by Western, particularly American, officials.

The notion of Westphalian states with sovereign powers within their own borders may be old-fashioned and obsolete but its replacements are being used to justify war everywhere on slim pretexts.

Russia is already suffering consequences as a result of its seizing of the Crimean Peninsula:

It hasn’t taken long for Russian financial markets to react to developments at the weekend, when Putin won parliamentary approval for military action in Ukraine as Russian forces consolidated control over Crimea, raising the prospect of a real war with Ukraine and a new Cold War with the West.

Moscow share price indexes plunged on Monday by over 10 percent, while the central bank has dramatically raised interest rates and spent an estimated $10 billion in reserves to defend the rouble after it hit a record low.

Analysts warn that steps already taken to defend the rouble threaten to push the economy into recession. If East-West tensions persist, they could further deter foreign investment, perpetuate economic stagnation and perhaps ultimately undermine Russia’s own political stability.

I’m not sure there’s anything we could do that’s worse than what Russia is doing to itself. The Europeans are too dependent on Russia’s gas and oil to apply too much pressure to them.

I’m hearing a lot about tossing Russia out of the G8. Why is Russia a member, anyway? I seem to recall that it was intended by President Clinton as an encouragement for future good behavior on Russia’s part. Like a lot of Clinton foreign policy that hasn’t worked out particularly well.

For reasons not entirely clear to me Woodrow Wilson’s Fourteen Points, which formed the basis of the armistice agreement that ended World War I, is receiving new attention. Over just the last few days I’ve read three different invocations of them. Here are the fourteen points, excerpted from a longer speech:

1. Open covenants of peace must be arrived at, after which there will surely be no private international action or rulings of any kind, but diplomacy shall proceed always frankly and in the public view.
2. Absolute freedom of navigation upon the seas, outside territorial waters, alike in peace and in war, except as the seas may be closed in whole or in part by international action for the enforcement of international covenants.
3. The removal, so far as possible, of all economic barriers and the establishment of an equality of trade conditions among all the nations consenting to the peace and associating themselves for its maintenance.
4. Adequate guarantees given and taken that national armaments will be reduced to the lowest points consistent with domestic safety.
5. A free, open-minded, and absolutely impartial adjustment of all colonial claims, based upon a strict observance of the principle that in determining all such questions of sovereignty the interests of the population concerned must have equal weight with the equitable claims of the government whose title is to be determined.
6. The evacuation of all Russian territory and such a settlement of all questions affecting Russia as will secure the best and freest cooperation of the other nations of the world in obtaining for her an unhampered and unembarrassed opportunity for the independent determination of her own political development and national policy, and assure her of a sincere welcome into the society of free nations under institutions of her own choosing; and, more than a welcome, assistance also of every kind that she may need and may herself desire. The treatment accorded Russia by her sister nations in the months to come will be the acid test of their good will, of their comprehension of her needs as distinguished from their own interests, and of their intelligent and unselfish sympathy.
7. Belgium, the whole world will agree, must be evacuated and restored, without any attempt to limit the sovereignty which she enjoys in common with all other free nations. No other single act will serve as this will serve to restore confidence among the nations in the laws which they have themselves set and determined for the government of their relations with one another. Without this healing act the whole structure and validity of international law is forever impaired.
8. All French territory should be freed and the invaded portions restored, and the wrong done to France by Prussia in 1871 in the matter of Alsace-Lorraine, which has unsettled the peace of the world for nearly fifty years, should be righted, in order that peace may once more be made secure in the interest of all.
9. A re-adjustment of the frontiers of Italy should be effected along clearly recognizable lines of nationality.
10. The peoples of Austria-Hungary, whose place among the nations we wish to see safeguarded and assured, should be accorded the freest opportunity of autonomous development.
11. Romania, Serbia, and Montenegro should be evacuated; occupied territories restored; Serbia accorded free and secure access to the sea; and the relations of the several Balkan states to one another determined by friendly counsel along historically established lines of allegiance and nationality; and international guarantees of the political and economic independence and territorial integrity of the several Balkan states should be entered into.
12. The Turkish portions of the present Ottoman Empire should be assured a secure sovereignty, but the other nationalities which are now under Turkish rule should be assured an undoubted security of life and an absolutely unmolested opportunity of autonomous development, and the Dardanelles should be permanently opened as a free passage to the ships and commerce of all nations under international guarantees.
13. An independent Polish state should be erected which should include the territories inhabited by indisputably Polish populations, which should be assured a free and secure access to the sea, and whose political and economic independence and territorial integrity should be guaranteed by international covenant.
14. A general association of nations must be formed under specific covenants for the purpose of affording mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike.

Some are obviously obsolete (#7) while others, e.g. 2, 3, at least notionally guide U. S. policy today. I think that #1 could use a little more attention than it receives.

Relevant? Irrelevant? Dated? Remarkably current? As I pointed out elsewhere I think that we’re still reeling from the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. I’m pretty sure I could go to Google News and find three stories that stem from that collapse without trying particularly hard.

Jimmy Carter’s national security advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski takes to the opinion pages of the Washington Post urging action on President Obama in response to the situation in Ukraine:

If Ukraine is crushed while the West is simply watching, the new freedom and security in bordering Romania, Poland and the three Baltic republics would also be threatened.

This does not mean that the West, or the United States, should threaten war. But in the first instance, Russia’s unilateral and menacing acts mean the West should promptly recognize the current government of Ukraine as legitimate. Uncertainty regarding its legal status could tempt Putin to repeat his Crimean charade. Second, the West should convey — privately at this stage, so as not to humiliate Russia — that the Ukrainian army can count on immediate and direct Western aid so as to enhance its defensive capabilities. There should be no doubt left in Putin’s mind that an attack on Ukraine would precipitate a prolonged and costly engagement, and Ukrainians should not fear that they would be left in the lurch.

Meanwhile, NATO forces, consistent with the organization’s contingency planning, should be put on alert. High readiness for some immediate airlift to Europe of U.S. airborne units would be politically and militarily meaningful. If the West wants to avoid a conflict, there should be no ambiguity in the Kremlin as to what might be preciptated by further adventurist use of force in the middle of Europe.

Keep in mind that Dr. Brzezinski has been wrong about practically every major foreign policy issue over the period of the last 35 years. I’ve made no secret of my lack of regard for his advice see here and here. I believe that his advice in this op-ed is flawed as well.

Ukraine’s situation is distinctive, different from that of Poland, Romania, Lithuania, Estonia, or Latvia. It was part of Tsarist Russia, it was a republic of the Soviet Union, it is predominantly Slavic, and Russia’s strategic posture demands secure access to Black Sea ports. Is there any real evidence that Poland will be threatened—not feel threatened but be threatened—by Russia? Poland is a member of NATO, as are the other countries mentioned. Ukraine is not a NATO member. Once again, Dr. Brzezinski is asking the U. S. to provide the same assurances to non-NATO members as it does to members without producing a conceptual framework for doing so.

And what would you do if you were Vladimir Putin and NATO forces were put on alert? Would you consider it provocative? I certainly would. Rather than defusing the situation it would be an escalation of it.

I honestly don’t know why the man continues to have access to the editorial pages of major newspapers.

Thirty years ago zebra mussels, a European native species, were introduced into the Great Lakes. These illegal aliens are believed to have arrived in the ballast water of ocean-going ships that entered the Lakes through the St. Lawrence Seaway. They form great clumps, eat the indigenous phytoplankton, and have generally been an environmental catastrophe. A clever biologist believes he has found a way to attack them safely. Safe for everything but the zebra mussels, that is:

Now the mussels may have met their match: Daniel P. Molloy, an emeritus biologist at the New York State Museum in Albany and a self-described “Bronx boy who became fascinated by things living in water.”

Inspired by Rachel Carson’s “Silent Spring” in high school, Dr. Molloy, now 66, has long been a pioneer in the development of environmentally safe control agents to replace broad-spectrum chemical pesticides.

Leading a team at the museum’s Cambridge Field Research Laboratory in upstate New York, he discovered a bacterium, Pseudomonas fluorescens strain CL145A, that kills the mussels but appears to have little or no effect on other organisms.

Although I would rejoice at an effective way to combat the zebra mussels that have wreaked havoc on fishing in the Great Lakes, I’ve got to admit to a healthy skepticism about the strategy that’s being described. I think the same thing was said about releasing rabbits in Australia and then about releasing the succession of viruses that have been tried to reduce the rabbit population. Over time the population of genetically resistant rabbits grows and the merry-go-round takes another spin.

Jeffrey Dorfman observes that barring some transcendent conversion experience large federal deficits are here to stay:

Defense spending is up by $232 billion above inflation and population growth, representing about 22 percent of the inflation and population-adjusted spending increase. Obviously, we have the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to thank for some of this, but those wars are winding down now. Secretary Hagel is proposing spending cuts to stay within the sequester-proposed spending limits. If Republicans are serious about reducing government spending, they probably need to find some defense cuts that they can live with.

Spending on social safety net programs-Medicaid, unemployment benefits, housing subsidies, food assistance, and another seventy-plus programs the federal government runs-has increased a total of $294 billion beyond inflation and population growth, accounting for 28 percent of the extra spending growth. Certainly some of this is related to the 2007-2009 recession and to the increased cost of health care, but the recession ended 56 months ago so it seems somewhat specious to blame these costs on economic conditions five and one-half years ago. Rather, it seems likely that the Obama administrations persistent and extremely active efforts to sign more people up for all these government benefits is a significant contributing factor to the explosion in this spending category.

Finally, we get to the government benefit programs for the elderly. Spending on Social Security and Medicare has risen by $415 billion above and beyond if it had grown at the rate of inflation plus population growth. Partly this is due, to the number of elderly growing at a faster percentage than the overall population and partly it is due to President Bush’s Medicare Part D prescription drug coverage program. Regardless of the causes, spending to benefit the elderly accounts for 39 percent of our above-inflation-and-population-growth spending increase.

There is no ready alternative to any of those programs, there is no will on the part of either major political party to cut any of those programs enough to make a difference, and there’s even less will to raise taxes enough to pay for them. Hence, his conclusion: mammoth federal budget deficits are here for the foreseeable future.

That’s all well and good for the federal government which is a monetary sovereign and can credit itself with the money to finance its deficits with a wave of an electronic wand. The situation is different for state and local governments. Their budgets will be pressed by the poor and elderly as well and they’re already about at their credit limit. Illinois, for example, has raised its taxes substantially, still has a fiscal nightmare on its hands, and has the worst credit rating among the states. Additionally, in the low trust environment we’ve been entering even more law enforcement, something traditionally left to state and local governments, will be required. Their problems are likely to become worse rather than better.

That brings up something I’m surprised isn’t more obvious to people. An aggressive regulatory state inherently produces greater income inequality. The rich will always get preferential treatment and they’ll inevitably use it to become even richer. That’s an alternative not open to the rest of us.

The editors of the New York Times have finally recognized that the economic policies of the last three administrations, founded as they were on increased higher education as the key to economic security, have been built on sand:

Research by three economists — Paul Beaudry, David Green and Benjamin Sand — goes beyond familiar explanations for wage stagnation like global competition and labor-saving technology. Examining the demand for college-educated workers, they found that businesses increased hiring of college graduates in the 1980s and 1990s in adapting to technological changes. But as the information technology revolution matured, employer demand waned for the “cognitive skills” associated with a college education.

As a result, since 2000, many college graduates have taken jobs that do not require college degrees and, in the process, have displaced less-educated lower-skilled workers. “In this maturity stage,” the report says, “having a B.A. is less about obtaining access to high paying managerial and technology jobs and more about beating out less-educated workers for the barista or clerical job.”

The problem with that as a strategy is that the cost of higher education and the way we finance higher education have burdened the new college grads, employed in jobs that don’t actually require college educations and paid commensurately, with high levels of debt which reduces their spending on other things, further slowing the economy. I have some difficuly, however, relating their prescription to their diagnosis:

Increasing the number of high-paying jobs also depends on strategies like enhancing public spending to fix roads and bridges and to hire more teachers, as well as developing new energy and technology industries through government-financed research. Otherwise, the norm may very well be an economy where even college-educated workers cannot thrive.

I, on the other hand, think that fixing roads and building bridges primarily produces jobs that don’t require college educations and hiring more teachers? Please. We’re back to the story of the cat and rat farm.

Mort Zuckerman on the other hand sees things a little differently:

Job losses in the low-wage and minimum-wage category is the critical issue of our day: Too many of the poor are not working full time or at all. Income inequality isn’t so much the problem as income inadequacy. A more robust economy, stoked by growth-oriented policies from Washington, would help produce the jobs and opportunities that millions of Americans need to climb the economic ladder.

A landmark new study by Harvard economics professor Raj Chetty asserts that advances in opportunity provided by expanded social programs have been offset by increased global trade and advanced technology that in turn have limited the traditional sources of middle-income jobs. But there is a simpler reason that the country remains mired in the weakest recovery from a recession since World War II: Government has diminished animal spirits by displaying a hostile attitude toward business.

That attitude is evident in everything from excessive corporate taxes to the incompetence and dishonesty of the ObamaCare rollout. Government is perpetually establishing economic policies and rules that business perceives as overregulation, dampening the willingness to invest—as witnessed by the slowest rate of capital investment in decades on corporate plant equipment and machinery.

but his solution, too, is more education.

I think the solution is more economic activity and that the problem with the present administration’s economic policy is not a “hostile attitude toward business” but a systematic preference for policies that don’t increase economic activity. That includes everything from energy policy to trade policy to tax policy to healthcare policy. It’s not that the administration is opposed to more economic activity but that they want other things more.