Binyamin Netanhayu is awesome.

Now I admit, it may seem like a strange thing to say. Especially in a forum where national leader hero worship would not seem like a good thing.

But my god, look at this man’s history. For a second, pretend to be a deluded patriotic nationalist.

  1. Elite special forces commando who commanded other commandos in major high-risk hostage rescue operations of the 1970s, including a plane hijack.

  2. Fighter of every major war of the 1960-70s in Israel from Yom Kippur to Suez Canal to Golan Heights.

  3. Harvard and MIT engineering, politics and business graduate.

  4. Consultant in top business consulting firms in the US.

  5. Brother of another elite commando who died in one of the most hostage rescue operations of Israel in Uganda.

  6. A high level diplomat in the US by his mid-20s.

  7. As a finance minister, the most pro-market, pro-free-trade minister in Israel ever known, who was the enemy of labour unions, and a vigorous cutter of taxes and government spending.

  8. Youngest prime minister of Israel.

  9. Lone man who was opposed by both the Israeli left-wing parties and right-wing parties for having chosen peaceful choices in letting Palestinians peacefully have a self-determined local government in Hebron, West Bank, instead of choosing to fight them. Stood for principles rather than electoral popularity.

  10. Was leading minister for half a dozen major ministries.

  11. Only Israeli PM to speak in a perfect American accent

I am sorry, but if I were a non-libertarian living in Israel, I would so vote for this guy. Hell, he could be the leader of my country if he wanted.

He is like the Israeli Barry Goldwater. Some newspapers were tagging him as a nationalist extremist, because he belongs to a far right wing party. But even so, he has taken unpopular pro-peace, pro-market stands that alienate even right-wing populists, and refused to succumb to right-wing nationalist protectionism. Like I said, an Israeli Barry Goldwater.

This man…he is perfect. On the occasions that he speaks on television, he is clear, articulate, and straightforward, and without the evasive mannerisms of many politicians. He is not insulting or hyperbolic.

Hell, he is too intelligent to have been a national leader in most parts of the world. His education, his sane smart policies, his scholarly perspective which looks at foreign policy with respect to a good grasp of history - the man knows what he is supposed to know.

And if you pretend to be a patriot, then you can’t help but admire his background as a dedicated special forces soldier fighting in dangerous battles. The man is a hero.

Haha. Looks like you’ve got a man-crush.

The military crap doesn’t impress me and a lot of that stuff seems only relative to Israel, which isn’t saying much. Since they are nowhere near a free society. Barry Goldwater would never get elected there in a million years.

I don’t see the good in being ‘enemy of labor unions’. It’s not like they have a free market for labor in that country; and even so, a free society is not anti-labour union. The whole thing is a command economy, so the point is moot. Did you know that only 5- 8 percent of Israel is private property? Being such a small country (meaning none of it is unused), that is a pretty sad.

“This man…he is perfect.”

  • "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss." - The Who. You, too, will become disillusioned with “government leaders”. It will not matter who they are. Give it time.

Netanyahu Set to Fight Recession With Repeat Dose of Tax Cuts

Share Business ExchangeTwitterFacebook| Email | Print | A A A

By David Rosenberg

Feb. 26 (Bloomberg) – Benjamin Netanyahu plans to apply the same small-government policies when he becomes Israel’s prime minister as he did six years ago as finance minister. Then, his tax and spending cuts helped lift the economy out of recession. They may be less suitable this time around.

The Likud party leader, who has until April 3 to form a coalition, faces a shrinking economy, a growing budget deficit and a frozen corporate bond market. The recession in the U.S. and Europe has clobbered Israeli exports, which account for about half of gross domestic product in a country whose economy is smaller than Singapore’s. His only fiscal tool for the moment is a budget drawn up in August and stalled in the parliament.

“Israel must take steps in same spirit as the U.S. and Europe, to allow an even bigger deficit,” said Avi Ben Bassat, a professor of economics at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. “The situation requires a change in economic policy.”

Netanyahu’s plans for the economy may encounter objections from his future partners. Although assembling his coalition could take several weeks, one probable member, the Shas party, said during the election campaign that it would seek to restore child allowances that had been reduced under Netanyahu.

Israeli GDP fell at a 0.5 percent annual rate in the final quarter of 2008. The Bank of Israel, whose index of leading indicators posted its steepest drop in January since records began in 1975, forecasts a 0.8 percent decline in GDP this year. Merchandise exports fell 26 percent in January to $3.18 billion from $4.32 billion a year ago.

Losing Jobs

The Tel Aviv Stock Exchange’s benchmark TA-25 Index is down 46 percent from its peak on October 2007. Israel’s state Employment Service says a record 19,700 people lost their jobs in January.

“There will be a certain amount of deterioration before we can turn around the economy’s direction,” Netanyahu said Feb. 23 at a meeting of Likud lawmakers. “We face an economic crisis that we haven’t seen in many years.”

Netanyahu, 59, has vowed to lower Israeli taxes as he did as finance minister. He also promised during the campaign to liberalize the real-estate market, saying the Israel Land Administration’s near-monopoly inflates housing costs.

To solve the credit crunch, he says Israel should use existing U.S. loan guarantees to extend credit to companies, and proposes spending an unspecified amount of money on building roads and rails.

Industrial Policy?

Gidi Grinstein, president of the Tel Aviv-based Reut Institute policy group, said that won’t be enough. He proposes the government undertake an “industrial policy” aimed at opening markets in China and India and developing new technologies.

“The paradox of Netanyahu is that he has set very ambitious growth objectives for the Israeli economy, but the steps he has proposed won’t bring about the kind of growth he is talking about,” Grinstein said by telephone.

Almost since its creation in 1948, Israel’s economy has been dominated by government. Officials decided everything from the exchange rate to whether companies could raise capital. The government and labor unions controlled such big companies as Koor Industries Ltd. and Israel Chemicals Ltd.

While liberalization began in the 1980s, it stalled in the following decade – including during Netanyahu’s first tenure as prime minister from 1996 to 1999 – as the country’s technology industry and the Palestinian peace process boosted growth.

Selling Companies

By the time Netanyahu left the finance ministry in 2005 to protest the government’s withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, he had sold or begun selling El Al Israeli Airlines Ltd., the biggest carrier; Bezeq Ltd., the biggest telecommunications provider; and Israel Discount Bank Ltd., the third-largest lender.

“It’s very important to create an internal engine by reining in the size of government, cutting taxes and the bureaucracy,” said Ohad Marani, who served as the top aide during Netanyahu’s first year as finance minister. “He’s very much for small government.”

By cutting spending, Netanyahu helped reduce Israel’s budget deficit to 1.8 percent of GDP in 2005 from 5.1 percent in 2003. The TA-25 plunged 5.2 percent the day he announced he was stepping down. The deficit may reach 5 percent of GDP this year, Ben Bassat estimates.

“He was very decisive,” said Yossi Bachar, who replaced Marani. “He resisted all the pressures on him, even if it cost him politically.”

Fewer Challenges

Thanks in part to Netanyahu’s actions as finance minister, his government will have fewer challenges than those in the U.S. and Europe, said London-based Senior Economist Reinhard Cluse of UBS AG.

“Israel has a tough business cycle outlook, but no more than that,” Cluse said by telephone, adding that the government must take “expansionary” fiscal measures soon or risk seeing the slump extend into 2010.

One of the biggest challenges Netanyahu faces is the crisis in Israel’s corporate bond market, said Leo Leiderman, chief economist at Bank Hapoalim Ltd. in Tel Aviv.

The Tel Bond 20 index of the biggest corporate bonds fell as much as 19 percent in the last quarter as pension funds and other institutions were forced to sell securities to meet cash calls from investors. About 20 billion shekels ($4.7 billion) in non-bank debt comes due this year, the Bank of Israel estimates.

“The question is how the corporate sector will meet its obligations to bondholders and banks,” Leiderman said by telephone. “The economy is small enough that two or three significant players getting into trouble could paralyze the whole system.”

To contact the reporter on this story: David Rosenberg in Jerusalem at drosenberg1@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: February 25, 2009 17:01 EST

The problem with Israel is the unions there, their like French style.

I didn’t know all that stuff. I like him even more now.

About labour unions - like somebody else said, we are talking about legally powerful labour unions that can arbitrarily ensure to legislate a lot of things they want in ways similar to how French airport controllers can keep their shifts secret from managers and still get several weeks of vacations, and so on.

Anyway, yes, being a free marketer is moot in a non-free country. It’s interesting how it is the other way round too.

Kevin Rudd is a “revolutionary socialist” in a relatively hardcore capitalist, classical liberal nation like Australia, which keeps refusing to implement whatever he demands. The same with statists in Chile.

That’s the amusing thing about coalition governments. The one who becomes the leader least reflects the political climate of the nation. See Stephen Harper in Canada or Herman van Rompuy in Belgium. Netanyahu is one such person.

I’d say a lot of nations would benefit if they exchanged leaders with Netanyahu. Maybe Australia or United States can take Netanyahu, and Israel can take Obama or Rudd.

Paleo-conservatives themselves want Netanyahu as the American President. http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/index.php/2010/03/23/netanyahu-for-president/ As Fleming says, there has not been an intelligent educated leader in the US for a long time, while Netanyahu boasts more intelligence and knowledge than Obama, Bush, and Clinton combined.

I like Goldwater, and I like Netanyahu.

Netanyahu is certifiably insane and may start WWIII. Also, he just ordered his special forces to kill humanitarian aid workers including an American in international waters. If I were a deluded nationalistic patriot, I’d say he should be bombed.

Netanyahu is certifiably insane and may start WWII

where is the certificate?. Hyperbole may be cute, but it doesn’t advance your argument, it just says ‘I’m upset about X’

Prateek:

I think it’s okay for someone to be for freedom in a non-free country, of course, but I wouldn’t look for him to break out of the basic paradigm in the political sphere. Most, if not all, of the owners of property in Israel did not get it through the free market, but through the coercion of the state. So it is difficult to say that tax breaks for them are meaningful, since it isn’t even tax on their property. Since they don’t have any property. I don’t think one should talk about property rights, unless one can define meaningfully what they are and how each person is entitled to it. Otherwise, any common criminal or crime boss getting ‘tax write-offs’ for laundered money would be the same as someone who earned it through being a worker or entrepreneur .

Benjamin wrote:

Thus said socialists of Goldwater, claiming he would start a war with Russia; thus say socialists (see above) of Netanyahu. The usual socialist propoganda, about why we need (lol!) more socialist politicians, whether Johnson in the US back in the 1960’s, or some socialist in Israel today.

Because good socialists are anti-nationalists apparently. (In fact, socialists are the definition of nationalists: see Sennholz 1955. How Can Europe Surive?)

*Aid workers, or bandit sympathizers armed with knives and poles, who attack first? Videos show the latter.

Are you commenting on a style of a post (poetic exaggeration) instead of on the message it is trying to convey? Does that mean that you were irritated enough by the post that you had to respond, but at the same time found it hard to refute its point?

John Ess: Most, if not all, of the owners of property in Israel did not get it through the free market, but through the coercion of the state.

Nearly all of the land in the hands of Israeli property owners today was unoccupied unused land. We had this debate already in the other thread and I don’t want to repeat everything all over again. Unless you’re a closet statist and believe in the legitimacy of States to just arbitrarily claim unused territory, then your accusation above is pure statist nonsense unless you invert the “Most, if not all,..” to say “Few, or some, …”

Though it’s certainly nice that he wants to cut taxes and government spending, he would be better off privatizing and deregulating at first. Israel’s economy has more to gain from deregulation than it does from tax cuts.

DD5, I don’t understand what you are saying. Since your premises seem to lead to a pot calling the closet statist kettle black. You are saying that it was unused and that states can’t “just arbitrarily claim unused territory.” I don’t believe the first (even the Israeli government does not say this; it is basically people who believe the much-debunked Joan Peters account of fake history), but even if both are true…

How exactly does that legitimize Israel’s ownership of the land? If states have no ability to arbitrarily claim territory, which I don’t dispute, then Israel still owns no land since that is how they acquired land. Rather than through the free market. And thus it is still in question as to who owns what within Israel. Maybe there is no question and they own none of it. But at the very least, it is still in question. And thus the cart is before the horse in talking about tax cuts.

And it’s not even the land that they occupy. But all the property damage, that is obviously a crime, against people who want to live there but fail to live up to lame governmental bureaucratic standards.

" Like I said, an Israeli Barry Goldwater."

An Israeli George Bush (I and II) would be the more appropriate comparison.

The man is a fascist pig using market terminology he doesn’t even understand to propagate his interventionist agenda he probably doesn’t understand either.

Like Bush, he gets the reputation for a free marketeer by mostly his socialist opponents and vastly no better ignorant supporters. His interventionist and fascist policies get confused for “privatizations” and free market policies, and when they fail, the free market gets the blame.

He supports bail-outs, Monetary pumping, government spending during recessions, etc. Yeah, he’s your typical Keynesian supply side Republican.

I just watched Netanyahu’s speech at the United Nations from last September. I agree that he is a very good speaker, and I was happy to hear him call the UN Human Rights Council “a misnamed institution if there ever was one.”

[INFLAMMATORY ACCUSATION DELETED]

Most land in the hands of Israeli property owners used to be owned by private induviduals of Palestine extraction that had been expropriated.

It is the most land now in the “public ownership” of Israel that used to be unoccupied and unused.

“If states have no ability to arbitrarily claim territory, which I don’t dispute, then Israel still owns no land since that is how they acquired land”

Rightly so, but then the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is nothing but a statist manufactured conflict.

“Maybe there is no question and they own none of it. But at the very least, it is still in question.”

It makes no more sense to talk about Palestinian right to some land then Israeli then. What else could you have implied by saying that most of the land was acquired by coercion? Or in other words, stolen. There is no way to justify that claim in its totality without resorting to some statist theory of property rights.

“And thus the cart is before the horse in talking about tax cuts.”

Since we live in a statist world, I don’t see how this can possibly be relevant to just Israel and not also to every other State currently on the map of the entire Globe.

“And it’s not even the land that they occupy. But all the property damage, that is obviously a crime, against people who want to live there but fail to live up to lame governmental bureaucratic standards.”

The fact is that the Palestinians want to simply establish their own tyrranical State. This fact alone makes their side no more morally superior then that of Israel.

Not only that, but even from a sort of purely humanist point of view, I’m not at all convinced that the lives of the people currently living under occupation would be better off under a “free” Palestine. At least as compared to before the Intifada of the 80’s. Please provide me your case to as why their lives would be better off.

" I don’t understand what you are saying"

Somehow anti-Israel is being conflated with anti-State. This is a fatal mistake. Supporting the various Palestinians liberation movements is actually a very extreme statist position.

LeeO, that’s one thing we have to hand to the man.

He is a good speaker.

Not in the sense of the evasive, charismatic, wool-over-your eyes political speaker.

But a man who can articulate positions properly, speak directly and assertively, and address matters with a thoughtful scholarly perspective.

Just compare this man with people like Dan Quayle, Joe Biden, Sarah Palin, Barack Obama, John McCain, or James Inhofe. All these American politicans look like clowns and buffoons compared to this man from a tiny moderately wealthy country .