Gerald Ford is a genteel politician; at least his public demeanor leaves this impression. Watching his family yesterday during the National Cathedral memorial service affirms this (apples do not fall too far from the tree in most family orchards).

During a joint session of Congress (October 8, 1974) Gerald Ford outlined his economic policy. You can read or hear his speech in the Ford Library. He makes a number of “simply stated” points.

• voters want action
• politicians seeking consensus show leadership
• policy must be part of a “grand design”
• America cannot isolate itself: “International cooperation is absolutely essential and vital.”

Front headlines and speech outlines change, but themes persist. The electorate cares about issues, and the ballot is intended to provoke government action. Voters do not agree, and our differences seem more terse currently; what we want is “action”.
Gerald Ford acknowledged different political agendas and ideas while calling for “consensus”. Instead of visceral opposition, he recommended debate toward a “grand design” to resolve an issue: inflation.

Today, Federal debate includes limiting access to our borders by outsiders, their products, and their services. Gerald Ford broadened the variables in the debate by admitting the impact of “international cooperation”. In that context, he said, “But while we seek agreements with other nations, let us put our own economic house in order.” He considered that a first step in our “global village”.

During the past year, the Governors serving on the Federal Reserve Bank showed great concern with the core inflation rate. Gerald Ford’s speech tells us that inflation damages economies, and he took the lead on the issue.

President Ford articulated the problem with oil and food costs; he also gave definitive recommendations (he acknowledged the limitations on what America could do about its petroleum appetite) for farmers to farm and Congress to overturn the restrictions that pushed food prices.

He also said, “Number two: energy. America’s future depends heavily on oil, gas, coal, electricity, and other resources called energy. Make no mistake, we do have a real energy problem.”

During 1974, the United States had spent more than 16billion dollars in energy costs over the costs for 1973. The concerns are the same; the warnings similar, and the actions consistent. For some reason, we seldom get too far with resolving the inflationary effects of oil.

At that time, Gerald Ford recommended, “cleaner coal processes and nuclear fuel in new electric plants, and the quick conversion of existing oil plants. I propose that we, together, set a target date of 1980 for eliminating oil-fired plants from the Nation’s base-loaded electrical capacity.” We have done little of any suggestions made by Mr. Ford.

One benefit of death: our funeral and burial ceremonies remind us of our folly, our mortality, and our failure to resolve what inflates us.

Greenheads bite. They move slowly, land on your wrist or ankle, and bite morsels of flesh. You can whack them easily; their lumbering weight limits their speed.

Greenbacks move slowly too; they land on your international portfolio, and bite morsels out of your profits. You can’t whack them too easily; their lumbering weight makes them a necessity. Their influence on your portfolio and the US economy is obvious, but what does it mean?

Interest rate increases should prod the dollar’s value higher. Multinational company stocks should offer a haven when interest rates go up overseas when the currency is converted to dollars. As the Wall Street Journal points out (August 14, 2006), this has not worked for the past 14 years. Large cap (capital = stock price times the number of shares outstanding) stocks move in an opposite correlation to the dollar; the two asset classes trade in opposition to each other (when one is up, the other is down).

Now, according to Mike Thompson (Research Director, Thompson Financial), the two asset classes trade “in the same direction”. Thompson attributes this to the US economic shift toward a service economy from a product economy. Manufacturing economies send and obtain “goods wherever they are priced most favorably in terms of local currency.”

As a result, many money managers look for international companies that manufacture and distributed products within their own region or country. Not everyone agrees with this strategy since it ostensibly “gives up” on US multinationals.

If you want a strong dollar, cheer on Mr. Bernanke and his colleagues to push rates up further. This strategy may work for the dollar, but won’t do much for your variable rate mortgage.

Read some of my other articles found as Ethos Musings