Traditionally, this is a night of revelry to celebrate the end of one year and the start of another.
Of course it's also a period of reflection and new starts where we think about the things we didn't like and what to do to correct them.
It is amazing how Americans look at the last year and see it very differently.
Much of the population sees it as a period of slow but steady recovery with progress made against outside enemies and significant domestic progress.
Others see it as a unacceptable slow economic period with terrorism on the rise and American prestige on the demise around the world.
Oddly both of these have some validity, and it may be a matter of half full or half empty.
If you remember the financial crisis and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq the current state of affairs is better. The economy is growing, less American service people are in danger and we have made some progress in universal health care and climate change as well as some potential, if uncertain, changes in the Arab world where tyrants are gone, but turmoil is ongoing.
On the other hand, many Americans see the jobs available to them as low paying compared to what they once had, that threats of terrorism persist, illegal immigration is rampant, we have lost the respect of the world and the national debt is out of control.
How can both these views be somewhat valid?
Well the reality is we live in a complex world where changes are happening and the outcomes are not simply controlled. Some factor driving these things include the fact that America is entering a post industrial period where the skills required are complex and if you don't have them the jobs are unappealing and low paying.
The demographics of the country pretty much doom us to slow growth for the next period of time and the globalization of the economy means that over time standards of living will level off. This is good news if you live in a place with a low standard of living, not so good for Americans and Europeans.
Terrorism continues and whether it is better or worse is pretty subjective, but of course each new incident is covered in depth and leads to a feeling of unease.
The list goes on.
There are no simple solutions, even if we would like them.
Our best hope would be to realize these are complex and figure out what needs to be done to reach our goals which I think we agree on namely Peace on Earth, Health, Economic Improvements, and Clean Air and Water.
It doesn't seem likely, but we should all make that our New Year's Resolution.
Saturday, December 31, 2016
Friday, December 30, 2016
Gullible Americans
The Washington Post ran a story concerning a bunch of things that American believe that are provably false. I included the link before and while this article was focused on mostly political items it did include a question on autism and vaccines.
There re many other things that many Americans believe that are simply false, including things about climate change, how government money is spent, how refugees are vetted and so much more.
One would think that with the existence of the Internet where so much valid information is available and easily accessed we would have better facts at our disposal, and some do, but many can't distinguish between the phony sites and the real ones.
We also tend to believe lies that fit into our pre-conceived notions. I watch a video yesterday about some problems with millennials that had a lot to do with how they grew up using technology and failed to develop certain social skills. Now it may be accurate or not, its that persons opinion, but the comments about the video included a number of attacks on liberals. Now certainly phones that text and video games with chat are not some liberal conspiracy, so these commentators simply ignored most of the subject matter to make it a political issue.
In fact, we have made everything into a political issue even if it really shouldn't be one. Climate change is not a political issue, how to deal with it might be, but the science is not up for a vote.
Similarly religious beliefs, at least in this country, are not a political issue or shouldn't be.
Trying to deny people the right to vote is not something that should be a political issue, how they vote is.
Giving sick people needed care should not be a political issue.
Its truly scary that many Americans actually believe some of the things in this article and I don't see any near term solution.
Lying is now the best political tactic we have as long as we also troll the Internet to plant false stories supporting the lies.
Its a scary future.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/rampage/wp/2016/12/28/americans-especially-but-not-exclusively-trump-voters-believe-crazy-wrong-things/?utm_term=.b035a36c7401
There re many other things that many Americans believe that are simply false, including things about climate change, how government money is spent, how refugees are vetted and so much more.
One would think that with the existence of the Internet where so much valid information is available and easily accessed we would have better facts at our disposal, and some do, but many can't distinguish between the phony sites and the real ones.
We also tend to believe lies that fit into our pre-conceived notions. I watch a video yesterday about some problems with millennials that had a lot to do with how they grew up using technology and failed to develop certain social skills. Now it may be accurate or not, its that persons opinion, but the comments about the video included a number of attacks on liberals. Now certainly phones that text and video games with chat are not some liberal conspiracy, so these commentators simply ignored most of the subject matter to make it a political issue.
In fact, we have made everything into a political issue even if it really shouldn't be one. Climate change is not a political issue, how to deal with it might be, but the science is not up for a vote.
Similarly religious beliefs, at least in this country, are not a political issue or shouldn't be.
Trying to deny people the right to vote is not something that should be a political issue, how they vote is.
Giving sick people needed care should not be a political issue.
Its truly scary that many Americans actually believe some of the things in this article and I don't see any near term solution.
Lying is now the best political tactic we have as long as we also troll the Internet to plant false stories supporting the lies.
Its a scary future.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/rampage/wp/2016/12/28/americans-especially-but-not-exclusively-trump-voters-believe-crazy-wrong-things/?utm_term=.b035a36c7401
Thursday, December 29, 2016
Manufacturing never left
As the chart below shows manufacturing in this country has grown with a few exceptions fairly steadily since 1975. While this chart ends in 2011 the trend has continued.
What has gone away are jobs. This is caused by a number of factors.
One is that labor intensive manufacturing has moved to cheaper labor areas. Clothing manufacturing is a prime example which has been migrating for quite awhile, from its original northeast centers, to some southern state centers and now to cheaper overseas locations. Labor continues to be a significant factor in the cost of production so it determines location as other costs are relatively stable.
The second reason is automation. Industries that used to have many workers have replaced them with robots which are more dependable and ultimately much cheaper.
Other factors include more subtle influences, which includes things like subcontracting work, more use of overtime, part time workers and temporary labor, partly because under our system of benefits, employees come with a heavy burden. In fact the one thing that would increase our competitive posture the most and bring the most jobs back would be a national system of health and pensions which would reduce the cost of employment dramatically.
However, that is not likely. To bring jobs back is probably impossible on any significant scale. The United States is a huge economy and subject to world economic trends. If it becomes more profitable to hire workers here than elsewhere it will happen. However, the best manufacturing jobs are not overseas but being done by your friendly neighborhood robot.
Wednesday, December 28, 2016
Life is Temporary, Enjoy it
One of the characteristics of being human is we are aware of our own mortality.
Of course it may be something other creatures are also aware of, how would we know, but we tend to think it is unique to our species.
Sooner or later the point is driven home for all of us when someone we know and are close to dies.
Of course we don't want to accept it as the end and most of us maintain there is some sort of afterlife, because we are so important it can't just end.
Probably it was this struggling with death that led to the formation of our first religions or at least our first organized ones.
We have found burial sites dating back to very ancient times and to bury someone with valuable items indicates some belief that he or she will get to use them in some fashion.
Animals don't bury each other, they let nature dispose of their dead.
We on the other hand treat them as ongoing members of our family and society and take some elaborate steps to commemorate the dead.
When well known celebrities die unexpectedly it drives home the fact that life is indeed temporary.
Now we tend to brush off thoughts of our own mortality and spend our time worrying about quite trivial things.
The point is that while we need to do what we can to make the world better, the world will hardly notice when we are gone.
We all have a timer and while we don't know when it is going to end, it is and every day we spend miserable is one less day of joy.
They don't come back.
Of course it may be something other creatures are also aware of, how would we know, but we tend to think it is unique to our species.
Sooner or later the point is driven home for all of us when someone we know and are close to dies.
Of course we don't want to accept it as the end and most of us maintain there is some sort of afterlife, because we are so important it can't just end.
Probably it was this struggling with death that led to the formation of our first religions or at least our first organized ones.
We have found burial sites dating back to very ancient times and to bury someone with valuable items indicates some belief that he or she will get to use them in some fashion.
Animals don't bury each other, they let nature dispose of their dead.
We on the other hand treat them as ongoing members of our family and society and take some elaborate steps to commemorate the dead.
When well known celebrities die unexpectedly it drives home the fact that life is indeed temporary.
Now we tend to brush off thoughts of our own mortality and spend our time worrying about quite trivial things.
The point is that while we need to do what we can to make the world better, the world will hardly notice when we are gone.
We all have a timer and while we don't know when it is going to end, it is and every day we spend miserable is one less day of joy.
They don't come back.
Tuesday, December 27, 2016
Racism is Everywhere
A lot of people deny that they are racists when they behave like racists. Its hard to blame them when racism has become a part of almost everything in America.
The fact that we track statistics by race and ethnic origin perpetrates the very concept that people are not just people.
Now, this may be well intentioned, designed to measure progress or failure to progress, but the flaw lies in the idea that a large group of people have so much in common that they form a group.
Groups exist because they share a meaningful attribute. If we consider the color of a person's skin a meaningful attribute, it is racist.
Now researchers may be well intentioned and not even think about the fact that categorizing people in this way gives credibility to racism.
I have friends who are individuals. They come from different backgrounds, have different ethnic origins, practice different religions, have different jobs but the color of their skin should not be a distinguishing factor except in the sense that someone' hair color is. The fact that it is in this country its probably the most distinguishing characteristic is racism.
Now we consider racism a bad thing since we equate it with discrimination. It is certainly a tool used for that purpose, but one may be racist and not discriminate. If you tend to think that there are people who are not like you because of a characteristic they were born with, it is essentially a racist belief.
The point is that in America, racist beliefs are almost universal and are so ingrained into our society that I don't see it changing any time soon.
Not everyone will agree with this but when a person is judged by the color of their skin when you know nothing else about them, that is racism. If a group of black teenagers makes you nervous but a group of white teenager doesn't, that is racism. If you feel that police are justified in shooting unarmed black men because so many are dangerous, that is racism.
This list goes on and on, and its so ingrained that we think these beliefs are justifiable. They aren't, each person has the right to be judged based on their character, not some groups.
The fact that we track statistics by race and ethnic origin perpetrates the very concept that people are not just people.
Now, this may be well intentioned, designed to measure progress or failure to progress, but the flaw lies in the idea that a large group of people have so much in common that they form a group.
Groups exist because they share a meaningful attribute. If we consider the color of a person's skin a meaningful attribute, it is racist.
Now researchers may be well intentioned and not even think about the fact that categorizing people in this way gives credibility to racism.
I have friends who are individuals. They come from different backgrounds, have different ethnic origins, practice different religions, have different jobs but the color of their skin should not be a distinguishing factor except in the sense that someone' hair color is. The fact that it is in this country its probably the most distinguishing characteristic is racism.
Now we consider racism a bad thing since we equate it with discrimination. It is certainly a tool used for that purpose, but one may be racist and not discriminate. If you tend to think that there are people who are not like you because of a characteristic they were born with, it is essentially a racist belief.
The point is that in America, racist beliefs are almost universal and are so ingrained into our society that I don't see it changing any time soon.
Not everyone will agree with this but when a person is judged by the color of their skin when you know nothing else about them, that is racism. If a group of black teenagers makes you nervous but a group of white teenager doesn't, that is racism. If you feel that police are justified in shooting unarmed black men because so many are dangerous, that is racism.
This list goes on and on, and its so ingrained that we think these beliefs are justifiable. They aren't, each person has the right to be judged based on their character, not some groups.
Monday, December 26, 2016
Why not Libertarian
If you ask most Americans how other Americans should behave, the majority could care less. They certainly don't want them doing harmful things or generally illegal things (although) that varies, but the vast majority of us could care less what anyone else is doing in the privacy of their home or in their day to day activities.
If two people of the same sex enjoy being together and want to get married we really don't care.
What religion or non-religion we follow or don't follow isn't our concern.
What you drink, eat or even smoke is of little concern to most of us.
What sort of music you listen to as long as you're not blasting it in our ears is of no consequence.
This list goes on and on and for most social issues even where people express opinions in surveys, most really don't care unless it impacts them in some way.
In fact if you wanted to summarize how most Americans felt about things we want the country and streets safe, a great economy, clean air and water and an opportunity to be left alone.
Pretty simple stuff, although of course each of those issues can be broken into lots of sub-issues and they are.
If you consider these views and the major parties, you might wonder why more Americans aren't Libertarians?
When you survey Americans about 40% identify as Independent, more than identify as Democrats or Republicans.
Avery insignificant number identify as libertarians. This is partly because in America the only two parties that we consider important are the two major parties.
Its part of our winner take all approach to politics and also because the two parties have been able to institutionalize themselves into elections.
Our third and fourth parties are considered irrelevant by most even though in many cases, especially the libertarian party it might reflect the views of Americans the best.
If two people of the same sex enjoy being together and want to get married we really don't care.
What religion or non-religion we follow or don't follow isn't our concern.
What you drink, eat or even smoke is of little concern to most of us.
What sort of music you listen to as long as you're not blasting it in our ears is of no consequence.
This list goes on and on and for most social issues even where people express opinions in surveys, most really don't care unless it impacts them in some way.
In fact if you wanted to summarize how most Americans felt about things we want the country and streets safe, a great economy, clean air and water and an opportunity to be left alone.
Pretty simple stuff, although of course each of those issues can be broken into lots of sub-issues and they are.
If you consider these views and the major parties, you might wonder why more Americans aren't Libertarians?
When you survey Americans about 40% identify as Independent, more than identify as Democrats or Republicans.
Avery insignificant number identify as libertarians. This is partly because in America the only two parties that we consider important are the two major parties.
Its part of our winner take all approach to politics and also because the two parties have been able to institutionalize themselves into elections.
Our third and fourth parties are considered irrelevant by most even though in many cases, especially the libertarian party it might reflect the views of Americans the best.
Sunday, December 25, 2016
All Men (and Women) Are Created Equal
In the very beginning of this country we established those words as a self evident truth.
Of course they didn't mean it and didn't include women or slaves, but the words established a principle.
We need to recognize that everyone is in fact equal in the most fundamental way possible and treat each other as brothers and sisters.
Once you decide some people are not as worthy as other people you are violating a central tenet of our country and our society.
People do bad things at times and should be held responsible for their actions, but they should be provided the same rights as every one else in doing that.
It doesn't matter what your ethic background is, your religion, your sexual orientation or your political beliefs, we are all equal.
I can certainly disagree with people and at times hate their behavior but I try always to respect their fundamental rights.
Holding someone accountable does not mean treating them with disrespect.
Of course they didn't mean it and didn't include women or slaves, but the words established a principle.
We need to recognize that everyone is in fact equal in the most fundamental way possible and treat each other as brothers and sisters.
Once you decide some people are not as worthy as other people you are violating a central tenet of our country and our society.
People do bad things at times and should be held responsible for their actions, but they should be provided the same rights as every one else in doing that.
It doesn't matter what your ethic background is, your religion, your sexual orientation or your political beliefs, we are all equal.
I can certainly disagree with people and at times hate their behavior but I try always to respect their fundamental rights.
Holding someone accountable does not mean treating them with disrespect.
Saturday, December 24, 2016
Christmas Eve Thoughts
Generally Christmas is a time for celebration as the commemoration of the birth of Jesus. Now you may not be a Christian and that's fine but its generally celebrated as a time of joy and peace.
Now today I read a story about a prominent New York republican who said his wish list included the current president dying of mad cow's disease and the current first lady living in Africa with a Gorilla.
This follows some prior news stories about other republicans along similar lines.
Most republicans deny that racism was a part of their dislike of the administration, but the evidence is pretty clear really.
They may not be racists, but they believed the lies spread by the racists among them.
We have had 8 years of an improving economy after the initial year of transition and yet they think the country is in terrible shape.
We have improving deficits but they think the budget is out of control.
We have many less troops in danger but they think we are at greater risk.
Terrorism in this country is now mostly self generated but they think he has failed at controlling it.
They blame him for trends that have been going on long before he became president concerning manufacturing and technology.
Of course there are things that didn't go exactly as we would have wished, we do live in the real world where the unexpected happens and other players exist.
However on the whole the country has been kept safe and the economy has improved greatly from where it was.
Some Americans haven't transitioned to the new reality yet and cling to a past that isn't coming back.
I wish them well although they do need to move on with their lives.
The haters should think about why they hate, they think its obvious, but its mostly based on lies.
Take the season to reflect and be thankful for the last 8 years.
What's coming next may be a rough ride.
Now today I read a story about a prominent New York republican who said his wish list included the current president dying of mad cow's disease and the current first lady living in Africa with a Gorilla.
This follows some prior news stories about other republicans along similar lines.
Most republicans deny that racism was a part of their dislike of the administration, but the evidence is pretty clear really.
They may not be racists, but they believed the lies spread by the racists among them.
We have had 8 years of an improving economy after the initial year of transition and yet they think the country is in terrible shape.
We have improving deficits but they think the budget is out of control.
We have many less troops in danger but they think we are at greater risk.
Terrorism in this country is now mostly self generated but they think he has failed at controlling it.
They blame him for trends that have been going on long before he became president concerning manufacturing and technology.
Of course there are things that didn't go exactly as we would have wished, we do live in the real world where the unexpected happens and other players exist.
However on the whole the country has been kept safe and the economy has improved greatly from where it was.
Some Americans haven't transitioned to the new reality yet and cling to a past that isn't coming back.
I wish them well although they do need to move on with their lives.
The haters should think about why they hate, they think its obvious, but its mostly based on lies.
Take the season to reflect and be thankful for the last 8 years.
What's coming next may be a rough ride.
Friday, December 23, 2016
Number 1?
Many people in America are arrogant about the situation of their birth, meaning because of some relatively fortuitous series of events they were born in this country.
Now the odd of that aren't terrible, we have about 300 million citizens, but its now as common as being born Chinese or Indian.
Now the place of your birth isn't pure chance, we all have parents who live where they do because of actions taken at some time in the past, but the person being born has nothing to do with it.
Now it may be true everywhere that citizens of a country like to think they live in the best place imaginable.
Americans however seem to have a special sort of arrogance, we even have a bit of a reputation for it.
Of course the idea that being born in a particular spot on the planet somehow makes you better than anyone else is fundamentally ludicrous.
However we have many citizens who do indeed feel that way.
Now to be clear, America has a lot going for it economically and socially and because of some luck with oceans and other factors has overall created a first class standard of living for many.
We have a military and economy that is second to none. However the same can not be said for the rest of our institutions.
We certainly don't have the best education, health, or retirement systems.
Our political system fails to deliver true results if you were to measure each vote equally.
We have significant social issues related to diverse parts of our population.
We have an infrastructure that needs significant updates and repairs.
We saddle many of our young people with crippling debt to get an education.
Yet despite these and other issues we have so many that are certain we are in fact number one.
Like I said our education system isn't the best.
Now the odd of that aren't terrible, we have about 300 million citizens, but its now as common as being born Chinese or Indian.
Now the place of your birth isn't pure chance, we all have parents who live where they do because of actions taken at some time in the past, but the person being born has nothing to do with it.
Now it may be true everywhere that citizens of a country like to think they live in the best place imaginable.
Americans however seem to have a special sort of arrogance, we even have a bit of a reputation for it.
Of course the idea that being born in a particular spot on the planet somehow makes you better than anyone else is fundamentally ludicrous.
However we have many citizens who do indeed feel that way.
Now to be clear, America has a lot going for it economically and socially and because of some luck with oceans and other factors has overall created a first class standard of living for many.
We have a military and economy that is second to none. However the same can not be said for the rest of our institutions.
We certainly don't have the best education, health, or retirement systems.
Our political system fails to deliver true results if you were to measure each vote equally.
We have significant social issues related to diverse parts of our population.
We have an infrastructure that needs significant updates and repairs.
We saddle many of our young people with crippling debt to get an education.
Yet despite these and other issues we have so many that are certain we are in fact number one.
Like I said our education system isn't the best.
Thursday, December 22, 2016
Some Thoughts on the next year.
Taking over the presidency now will mean that the first few months or year will look like you are great. We have an economy that is near full employment few US service men is danger and generally speaking decent economic factors that are still challenged by our demographics.
Of course to continue on that path would require a continuation of the current policies which is not likely. Most likely to try to win over voters for the mid-terms we will see a tax cut pass.
Of course the main beneficiaries of that tax cut will be wealthy people and the average American will see very little of it, and may even pay more based on how they manipulate the deductions.
It will however be touted as a major tax cut and our gullible citizens will eat it up for a while.
Coupled with the increased infrastructure and defense spending that is likely we will see expanding deficits and greater national debt.
To offset some of that we will also see cuts in the services that working and poor people need, like food stamps, social security, medicare, education, environment and housing.
The general belief that these programs benefit only the unworthy will be put to the real world test.
The idea that good paying manufacturing jobs are going to spring up and offset these cuts is pretty delusional since any jobs that come here will be relatively low paying, especially in the rust belt states, where there are some available facilities and labor.
Now if we do in fact start to export undocumented immigrants and reduce new immigrants, those who elude capture will work for very low wages.
Reductions in the federal infrastructure will make enforcement more and more difficult as the budget cuts hit home.
The spending on infrastructure will create some jobs but the number of people is still limited by the availability of projects and physical space limitations. Of course if we march all those rust belt people to build a wall using ancient Egyptian techniques we may keep them occupied if meagerly paid.
It remains to be seen how this impacts the mid-terms since the gerrymandering in the states is so pervasive that it would take a real crisis to change the congress, and this cycle in the Senate is not so favorable.
What is pretty certain is that while public announcements will be about how great things are, reality is going to be, well reality.
Of course to continue on that path would require a continuation of the current policies which is not likely. Most likely to try to win over voters for the mid-terms we will see a tax cut pass.
Of course the main beneficiaries of that tax cut will be wealthy people and the average American will see very little of it, and may even pay more based on how they manipulate the deductions.
It will however be touted as a major tax cut and our gullible citizens will eat it up for a while.
Coupled with the increased infrastructure and defense spending that is likely we will see expanding deficits and greater national debt.
To offset some of that we will also see cuts in the services that working and poor people need, like food stamps, social security, medicare, education, environment and housing.
The general belief that these programs benefit only the unworthy will be put to the real world test.
The idea that good paying manufacturing jobs are going to spring up and offset these cuts is pretty delusional since any jobs that come here will be relatively low paying, especially in the rust belt states, where there are some available facilities and labor.
Now if we do in fact start to export undocumented immigrants and reduce new immigrants, those who elude capture will work for very low wages.
Reductions in the federal infrastructure will make enforcement more and more difficult as the budget cuts hit home.
The spending on infrastructure will create some jobs but the number of people is still limited by the availability of projects and physical space limitations. Of course if we march all those rust belt people to build a wall using ancient Egyptian techniques we may keep them occupied if meagerly paid.
It remains to be seen how this impacts the mid-terms since the gerrymandering in the states is so pervasive that it would take a real crisis to change the congress, and this cycle in the Senate is not so favorable.
What is pretty certain is that while public announcements will be about how great things are, reality is going to be, well reality.
Wednesday, December 21, 2016
The Best Rule I Ever Sort of Learned
When I say I learned this rule, I don't mean I always follow it, it just works every time I do. Its pretty simple and I read it in a book on investing many years ago.
I don't remember the name of the book and who wrote it, but I'm sure he was a successful wall street person. The book was mostly technical about how the stock market worked and explained calls, puts, margin calls, and every type of exotic trade that existed at the time.
In the very beginning of the book he shared what he considered his secrets to success, and they included most of the things I have heard many times since about diversifying, managing risk etc.
The one that stuck in my mind and which always has worked for me is based on ignoring your emotions in the stock market.
We tend to fall in love with our decisions and stick with them long after we should.
The simple advice was to acknowledge that you were wrong and get out of the trade if it doesn't do what you predicted.
This is basically a cut your losses strategy and its so very easy to follow, except it isn't, because you do obstinately fall in love with your decisions.
Another saying on wall street is that the stock market can be wrong longer than you can stay liquid.
If all your analysis indicates that some stock should go up and you invest in it, but it goes down, we tend to rationalize to ourselves that tomorrow will be when the market corrects.
Maybe, but just admitting you might have been wrong is the best strategy.
You can always buy it again when the market comes to its senses.
If it ever does.
Now this is a bit more for speculators than long term investors, but why follow an investment down thinking it might go up some time in the future?
Admit it, you are wrong, maybe as often as you are right.
I don't remember the name of the book and who wrote it, but I'm sure he was a successful wall street person. The book was mostly technical about how the stock market worked and explained calls, puts, margin calls, and every type of exotic trade that existed at the time.
In the very beginning of the book he shared what he considered his secrets to success, and they included most of the things I have heard many times since about diversifying, managing risk etc.
The one that stuck in my mind and which always has worked for me is based on ignoring your emotions in the stock market.
We tend to fall in love with our decisions and stick with them long after we should.
The simple advice was to acknowledge that you were wrong and get out of the trade if it doesn't do what you predicted.
This is basically a cut your losses strategy and its so very easy to follow, except it isn't, because you do obstinately fall in love with your decisions.
Another saying on wall street is that the stock market can be wrong longer than you can stay liquid.
If all your analysis indicates that some stock should go up and you invest in it, but it goes down, we tend to rationalize to ourselves that tomorrow will be when the market corrects.
Maybe, but just admitting you might have been wrong is the best strategy.
You can always buy it again when the market comes to its senses.
If it ever does.
Now this is a bit more for speculators than long term investors, but why follow an investment down thinking it might go up some time in the future?
Admit it, you are wrong, maybe as often as you are right.
Tuesday, December 20, 2016
Patriotism or Principles
Now that the electoral college has completed, some people argue that the American public should support the new administration to be patriotic.
Now of course, that isn't just accepting the result and recognizing that in our system they won, they think his policies should be supported.
It should of course be noted that the policies he ran on were not approved by a majority of the American people, only enough in the right states to win the electoral college.
So it is arguable that he should consider the majority viewpoint.
It is also vague as to how he intends to actually do what he promised.
I certainly would not support locking up his innocent opponent.
A wall between us and Mexico seems silly in this day and age.
Kicking out all immigrants is disruptive and unneeded.
Repeal of the health care law without a known alternative is dangerous.
Ripping up negotiated trade agreements is also a bad idea.
The list goes on.
Loyalty to America does not require supporting bad policies, it actually requires just the opposite.
When a majority of Americans opposed same sex marriage, it wasn't right.
When a majority of Americans supported slavery, it wasn't right.
When a majority of Americans didn't want women to vote, it wasn't right.
This list can also go on.
It is clear that standing up for the principles that made this country great is the right thing to do.
If the President or the Congress is on the wrong side of the issue, supporting them is not patriotic, its just the opposite.
After all, we aren't part of Great Britain.
Now of course, that isn't just accepting the result and recognizing that in our system they won, they think his policies should be supported.
It should of course be noted that the policies he ran on were not approved by a majority of the American people, only enough in the right states to win the electoral college.
So it is arguable that he should consider the majority viewpoint.
It is also vague as to how he intends to actually do what he promised.
I certainly would not support locking up his innocent opponent.
A wall between us and Mexico seems silly in this day and age.
Kicking out all immigrants is disruptive and unneeded.
Repeal of the health care law without a known alternative is dangerous.
Ripping up negotiated trade agreements is also a bad idea.
The list goes on.
Loyalty to America does not require supporting bad policies, it actually requires just the opposite.
When a majority of Americans opposed same sex marriage, it wasn't right.
When a majority of Americans supported slavery, it wasn't right.
When a majority of Americans didn't want women to vote, it wasn't right.
This list can also go on.
It is clear that standing up for the principles that made this country great is the right thing to do.
If the President or the Congress is on the wrong side of the issue, supporting them is not patriotic, its just the opposite.
After all, we aren't part of Great Britain.
Monday, December 19, 2016
Electoral College, Senate, States
In the United States we have a system that acts like a confederation of 50 independent entities that have come together. Now in the beginning, the original 13 colonies actually had some claim to this, since they had to some extent independent existences. Since then with the exception of Texas and California, the other states were created and out of territories.
The question therefore is why do we give some states more importance than the deserve based on population. It came about because the southern states being primarily agricultural with large populations of slaves would not have joined without being given disproportionate representation. This was why we have the senate constituted so that each state no matter its size gets an equal representation.
Of course that violates any concept of true democracy where each citizen gets an equal voice in the Government. A senator from California represents 19 million people while a senator from Wyoming represents about 300,000.
There is no rel justification for this in today's world, but it lives on because the senators from the small states have a vested interest and any such change needs to be ratified by the states themselves.
The electoral college to some extent reflects this distortion although not to the same extents since the house of representatives is closer to equal representation. However, the end result is that a candidate who lost the popular vote by almost three million votes won the electoral college vote. It is the system we have but it is not a representative one.
Arguments that using the popular vote to decide would make smaller states irrelevant ignore the fact that every vote would be prized. Yes, issues important to the majority of Americans would get priority, but shouldn't that be the case? It certainly is better than having a minority force its views on the majority.
I don't see any prospect of this changing any time soon, and many people who benefit from it are defending it out of self interest. The idea of the better good has been lost in America today. I miss it.
The question therefore is why do we give some states more importance than the deserve based on population. It came about because the southern states being primarily agricultural with large populations of slaves would not have joined without being given disproportionate representation. This was why we have the senate constituted so that each state no matter its size gets an equal representation.
Of course that violates any concept of true democracy where each citizen gets an equal voice in the Government. A senator from California represents 19 million people while a senator from Wyoming represents about 300,000.
There is no rel justification for this in today's world, but it lives on because the senators from the small states have a vested interest and any such change needs to be ratified by the states themselves.
The electoral college to some extent reflects this distortion although not to the same extents since the house of representatives is closer to equal representation. However, the end result is that a candidate who lost the popular vote by almost three million votes won the electoral college vote. It is the system we have but it is not a representative one.
Arguments that using the popular vote to decide would make smaller states irrelevant ignore the fact that every vote would be prized. Yes, issues important to the majority of Americans would get priority, but shouldn't that be the case? It certainly is better than having a minority force its views on the majority.
I don't see any prospect of this changing any time soon, and many people who benefit from it are defending it out of self interest. The idea of the better good has been lost in America today. I miss it.
Sunday, December 18, 2016
Sunday Mornings Easy?
There's an expression in a song that something is easy as Sunday Morning,
It brings to mind just relaxing and maybe going to church, having a nice breakfast reading the paper.
There's no pressure on Sunday because its a non work day for most.
Of course it isn't for everybody and actually less and less of us.
The whole idea of having a day of rest is predicated on a certain degree of civilization, where in fact having such a day doesn't result in starving or other disasters.
It probably a way to make sure that people spent time at religious services, so by making a day off mandatory you could regulate when they showed up to contribute.
Organized religion requires people to donate or tithe, making preachers essentially beggars.
Of course there is an alternative t that where the preachers spend the week earning and don't rely on donations.
Either way, having a sabbath day, whether Friday, Saturday or Sunday is pretty fundamental to many religions.
I don't know if the eastern religions have something similar, I suppose they probably do but can't say for sure.
The fact that Sundays are not as universally honored as maybe they once were is one of the issues some see with America becoming god less.
Similarly, things like same sex marriage, abortions, public indecency all are signs that we are becoming, or are already, a sinful nation.
What is an odd thing about Christianity particularly, is that while Jesus brought a new law, we kept the old one too.
A lot of people cite things from the old testament to justify behavior that seems to violate the teachings of Jesus, to love thy neighbor as thyself.
That a peaceful Sunday morning.
It brings to mind just relaxing and maybe going to church, having a nice breakfast reading the paper.
There's no pressure on Sunday because its a non work day for most.
Of course it isn't for everybody and actually less and less of us.
The whole idea of having a day of rest is predicated on a certain degree of civilization, where in fact having such a day doesn't result in starving or other disasters.
It probably a way to make sure that people spent time at religious services, so by making a day off mandatory you could regulate when they showed up to contribute.
Organized religion requires people to donate or tithe, making preachers essentially beggars.
Of course there is an alternative t that where the preachers spend the week earning and don't rely on donations.
Either way, having a sabbath day, whether Friday, Saturday or Sunday is pretty fundamental to many religions.
I don't know if the eastern religions have something similar, I suppose they probably do but can't say for sure.
The fact that Sundays are not as universally honored as maybe they once were is one of the issues some see with America becoming god less.
Similarly, things like same sex marriage, abortions, public indecency all are signs that we are becoming, or are already, a sinful nation.
What is an odd thing about Christianity particularly, is that while Jesus brought a new law, we kept the old one too.
A lot of people cite things from the old testament to justify behavior that seems to violate the teachings of Jesus, to love thy neighbor as thyself.
That a peaceful Sunday morning.
Saturday, December 17, 2016
North Carolina as exemplar
For all those who argue that people should accept the results of an election and support the winner, let me point to North Carolina. A state which is possibly the most successful example of a republican takeover that is probably going too far.
Clearly the biggest problem democrats had was a failure to contest local elections in many states. This led to a couple of things, one of which is the ability of State legislatures to redraw Congressional districts to deprive certain minorities a equal voice in Government and to place restrictions on voting to achieve the same goal.
North Carolina was either so good at this or so bad that the courts recognize the racist motivations and have ordered the same group of racists to redraw them.
Of course besides being racist they are also bigoted and made their mark last year by passing discriminatory laws that led to a national outcry.
So in the state wide Governor's race, the democrat won, not by a lot but by enough.
So now in an emergency session the state legislature and the lame duck Governor have passed restrictions on the incoming Governor designed to prevent him of many of his traditional powers.
So while North Carolina continues to set itself above the pack, its not all that unique in this country. We see state after state where the legislatures are under republican control gerrymander congressional districts and try to restrict minority voting rights.
The problem is that while this is getting some attention now, its a bit like a team that keeps losing wondering why when they consistently failed to make good draft picks over the years.
It just seems like the democrats focused too much on big national issues and ignored the local ones that eventually control the outcome.
There is no magical fix to this problem, at best it would have to wait until after the next census if somehow, despite the redrawn districts we can win back some of the states, like North Carolina and fix the districts.
But every local election between now and then is important and if we don't pay attention we will be left shaking our heads for another decade.
Clearly the biggest problem democrats had was a failure to contest local elections in many states. This led to a couple of things, one of which is the ability of State legislatures to redraw Congressional districts to deprive certain minorities a equal voice in Government and to place restrictions on voting to achieve the same goal.
North Carolina was either so good at this or so bad that the courts recognize the racist motivations and have ordered the same group of racists to redraw them.
Of course besides being racist they are also bigoted and made their mark last year by passing discriminatory laws that led to a national outcry.
So in the state wide Governor's race, the democrat won, not by a lot but by enough.
So now in an emergency session the state legislature and the lame duck Governor have passed restrictions on the incoming Governor designed to prevent him of many of his traditional powers.
So while North Carolina continues to set itself above the pack, its not all that unique in this country. We see state after state where the legislatures are under republican control gerrymander congressional districts and try to restrict minority voting rights.
The problem is that while this is getting some attention now, its a bit like a team that keeps losing wondering why when they consistently failed to make good draft picks over the years.
It just seems like the democrats focused too much on big national issues and ignored the local ones that eventually control the outcome.
There is no magical fix to this problem, at best it would have to wait until after the next census if somehow, despite the redrawn districts we can win back some of the states, like North Carolina and fix the districts.
But every local election between now and then is important and if we don't pay attention we will be left shaking our heads for another decade.
Friday, December 16, 2016
People are America
A lot of Americans have great pride about the country they live in. They feel that America has certain qualities that make it a better place than other countries. Now, the country has clearly become the major super power of the current age and to a large extent some of this was fueled by the fact that our neighbors to the North and South are not a threat to us and we are protected by great oceans to the east and west.
Of course that protection was of paramount importance before the age of ballistic missiles and even now, outside of massive destruction, the logistics of trying to invade the country would be daunting. So we have those natural barriers to help us.
We also were blessed with abundant natural resources and productive farmland to allow us to be largely self sufficient for much of out history. Yes there are some materials we have to import but overall we are in much better shape than much of the world.
However, we are not the only country with strong natural barriers and abundant resources.
What we might have that other countries do not is a somewhat unique combination of political, economic and social influences which have created a diverse culture of innovation and opportunity.
What we call the American Dream.
Its the belief that things are getting better, progress is good, and each generation will have more than the prior ones.
This was possibly our most unique attribute in comparison to the more traditional societies of Europe and Asia where your place in society was to some extent pre-determined by your birth.
We accepted those people and let them escape any caste bound restrictions. They thrived economically and socially, becoming part of the American melting pot.
This is the true fabric of America and what makes it to some extent exceptional.
However, we are seeing people losing faith in the American Dream, thinking the future is not better, that progress is bad and that America is is trouble.
Much of this is part of the latest developments as we move from old manufacturing to the next stage which is less labor intensive and more creative.
People think the American Dream is in the past. It never was and never will be.
It is accepting challenges and overcoming them in new and innovative ways.
We have people doing it and the dream is alive.
The future is as bright as ever.
Of course that protection was of paramount importance before the age of ballistic missiles and even now, outside of massive destruction, the logistics of trying to invade the country would be daunting. So we have those natural barriers to help us.
We also were blessed with abundant natural resources and productive farmland to allow us to be largely self sufficient for much of out history. Yes there are some materials we have to import but overall we are in much better shape than much of the world.
However, we are not the only country with strong natural barriers and abundant resources.
What we might have that other countries do not is a somewhat unique combination of political, economic and social influences which have created a diverse culture of innovation and opportunity.
What we call the American Dream.
Its the belief that things are getting better, progress is good, and each generation will have more than the prior ones.
This was possibly our most unique attribute in comparison to the more traditional societies of Europe and Asia where your place in society was to some extent pre-determined by your birth.
We accepted those people and let them escape any caste bound restrictions. They thrived economically and socially, becoming part of the American melting pot.
This is the true fabric of America and what makes it to some extent exceptional.
However, we are seeing people losing faith in the American Dream, thinking the future is not better, that progress is bad and that America is is trouble.
Much of this is part of the latest developments as we move from old manufacturing to the next stage which is less labor intensive and more creative.
People think the American Dream is in the past. It never was and never will be.
It is accepting challenges and overcoming them in new and innovative ways.
We have people doing it and the dream is alive.
The future is as bright as ever.
Thursday, December 15, 2016
Winter is Still Coming
The Siberian style cold air over most of the country is very appropriate since we are now a Russian puppet state. I gather they realized that trying to out build us was a losing strategy after the cold war so we got a Manchurian Candidate approach.
Of course despite all the evidence the incoming administration will deny it and since they know that about half the public will believe just about anything its a winning strategy. We never really anticipated so much disinformation being spread by a political candidate, thinking that certain rules of behavior would be observed.
How naive of us.
Cosidering the stakes involved, it really shouldn't be a surprise that its a no holds barred sort of thing. Our history of acting responsibly when running for office is now trashed forever, and if people thought dirty campaigning was a problem before they aint seen nothing yet.
Success breeds imitation and the number of fake news outlets and lies that we will see as a regular thing will simply expand. The public will decide that all politicians are untrustworthy meaning that even if you don't engage in this sort of behavior you will be guilty by association, and most likely lose.
I don't see any way to fix it, the cat is now out of the bag and whatever we thought about the politicians we had, they are going to get worse as the ones who sling the most mud will emerge as the winners.
The lies and misinformation will be impossible to sort through for many Americans so our only hope is that they will draw the line at having to learn Russian.
Da nyet, navernoe!
Of course despite all the evidence the incoming administration will deny it and since they know that about half the public will believe just about anything its a winning strategy. We never really anticipated so much disinformation being spread by a political candidate, thinking that certain rules of behavior would be observed.
How naive of us.
Cosidering the stakes involved, it really shouldn't be a surprise that its a no holds barred sort of thing. Our history of acting responsibly when running for office is now trashed forever, and if people thought dirty campaigning was a problem before they aint seen nothing yet.
Success breeds imitation and the number of fake news outlets and lies that we will see as a regular thing will simply expand. The public will decide that all politicians are untrustworthy meaning that even if you don't engage in this sort of behavior you will be guilty by association, and most likely lose.
I don't see any way to fix it, the cat is now out of the bag and whatever we thought about the politicians we had, they are going to get worse as the ones who sling the most mud will emerge as the winners.
The lies and misinformation will be impossible to sort through for many Americans so our only hope is that they will draw the line at having to learn Russian.
Da nyet, navernoe!
Wednesday, December 14, 2016
Political Correctness
There are a lot of people who think political correctness has run rampant in America and that its a form of censorship. Of course, what they are objecting to isn't always very clear, in some cases it relates to words we use to refer to other people like what do we call the original inhabitants of this country, Native Americans or Indians?
Now anyone can refer to them anyway they want, but it is possible that well meaning friends may point out that using Indians is no longer politically correct. Of course what we call politically correct is more accurately a socially correct issue.
Yes, there is no doubt that in certain scenarios, like television or media using a term considered offensive by some may result in negative feedback. It may more importantly result in a loss of sponsors and that of course hits their bottom line. However neither of those things are political, and the TV station can use pretty much any terms they want if they are willing to suffer whatever the consequences might be.
Take an issue that might be viewed as a politically correctness thing. Chick-Fil A took positions that upset the LGBT community. They have the right to take any positions they want and people have the right to respond how they see fit, within the law. Supporting marriage equality is more a human and religious issue, and the fact that someone who want the public to buy their product may feel the need to keep it happy is commerce more than politics. The owners free speech was never violated.
Concerning what we call certain people, in some cases it is more a matter of fashion. Calling the original occupants, Indians was a mistake in the first place, but it persisted. It is also in the modern day a bit confusing since the people from the Indian subcontinent are much more prevalent in the present than they were in colonial America. Native Americans is simply a more accurate description but of course American Indian while an inaccurate description would work.
Similarly, a lot of people think they haven't been allowed to say Merry Christmas and have been forced to say Happy Holidays instead. The point is that while the second term is more inclusive, the only ones general enforcing this are private citizens. So its really a social situation, not a political one. I've used both terms depending on the situation and who I'm talking to. I consider it polite to use Happy Holidays if addressing a non-Christian.
So if you have an urge to insult people or address them in a way that just annoys them, you are free to do so. However no one cares if you go around saying Merry Christmas to people, except possibly the person you are saying it too.
These aren't really issues, just things that people talk about to make the point that America is being ruined by liberals. Its really just about being polite. Of course if you do piss people off, you have to deal with the consequences.
Now anyone can refer to them anyway they want, but it is possible that well meaning friends may point out that using Indians is no longer politically correct. Of course what we call politically correct is more accurately a socially correct issue.
Yes, there is no doubt that in certain scenarios, like television or media using a term considered offensive by some may result in negative feedback. It may more importantly result in a loss of sponsors and that of course hits their bottom line. However neither of those things are political, and the TV station can use pretty much any terms they want if they are willing to suffer whatever the consequences might be.
Take an issue that might be viewed as a politically correctness thing. Chick-Fil A took positions that upset the LGBT community. They have the right to take any positions they want and people have the right to respond how they see fit, within the law. Supporting marriage equality is more a human and religious issue, and the fact that someone who want the public to buy their product may feel the need to keep it happy is commerce more than politics. The owners free speech was never violated.
Concerning what we call certain people, in some cases it is more a matter of fashion. Calling the original occupants, Indians was a mistake in the first place, but it persisted. It is also in the modern day a bit confusing since the people from the Indian subcontinent are much more prevalent in the present than they were in colonial America. Native Americans is simply a more accurate description but of course American Indian while an inaccurate description would work.
Similarly, a lot of people think they haven't been allowed to say Merry Christmas and have been forced to say Happy Holidays instead. The point is that while the second term is more inclusive, the only ones general enforcing this are private citizens. So its really a social situation, not a political one. I've used both terms depending on the situation and who I'm talking to. I consider it polite to use Happy Holidays if addressing a non-Christian.
So if you have an urge to insult people or address them in a way that just annoys them, you are free to do so. However no one cares if you go around saying Merry Christmas to people, except possibly the person you are saying it too.
These aren't really issues, just things that people talk about to make the point that America is being ruined by liberals. Its really just about being polite. Of course if you do piss people off, you have to deal with the consequences.
Tuesday, December 13, 2016
Irrational Objections
Whatever you think of our political process, it elected the most unqualified person ever as President this time. Of course that is a subjective evaluation since the qualifications for President are simply to win the election, but as far as actual experience goes he has the least, at least in the Political world.
Now he is making Cabinet picks based on probably the same sort of factors he used in the Business world and whatever you may think of them, objecting to them is irrational.
He was never going to pick them based on what the establishment would have liked. In fact his agenda may very well be to demolish them to the greatest possible extent. He certainly thinks they need to be changed drastically for the most part.
Now the surprise expressed at the picks is simply amazing to me. None of them are actually any stranger than having him as President. I mean what did people expect?
Like them or not, and maybe some will have trouble getting confirmed, but what he is doing is exactly what should have been expected of him.
Now he is making Cabinet picks based on probably the same sort of factors he used in the Business world and whatever you may think of them, objecting to them is irrational.
He was never going to pick them based on what the establishment would have liked. In fact his agenda may very well be to demolish them to the greatest possible extent. He certainly thinks they need to be changed drastically for the most part.
Now the surprise expressed at the picks is simply amazing to me. None of them are actually any stranger than having him as President. I mean what did people expect?
Like them or not, and maybe some will have trouble getting confirmed, but what he is doing is exactly what should have been expected of him.
Monday, December 12, 2016
American Delusions
There are many Americans who believe things that are simply not true. Now we always had rumors and sensationalism, but, and possibly it was me, it didn't seem like too many actually believed the really outlandish stuff.
Waiting on a supermarket line you would see headlines screaming out about secrets and conspiracies and while the papers continues to get sales obviously it just seemed rather funny overall.
However, many people who wouldn't actually pay money for those stories now can get them and even worse on the Internet for free.
So things like a fictional child sex ring in a DC pizzeria get circulated and believe by a certain percentage of people.
This isn't even the worse thing and the fact that certain targets get truly brutal layers of lies piled up on them starts to have a significant impact.
We have people who just believe things that don't have any basis in reality at all.
No one has tried to take everyone's guns away.
No one has ever said you can't say Merry Christmas if you want.
Immigrants and refugees don't get an all expense paid life in these United States.
Fraudulent voters are almost non-existent.
Climate change is not a Chinese hoax.
Islam is a religion,
Not all Muslims are terrorists.
The list goes on and on.
Oftentimes you see a lie promulgated with something that says "share this if you want to fix it". Well it wasn't actually broken in the first place.
Americans need to wake up and face reality. Its not as bad as your delusions.
Waiting on a supermarket line you would see headlines screaming out about secrets and conspiracies and while the papers continues to get sales obviously it just seemed rather funny overall.
However, many people who wouldn't actually pay money for those stories now can get them and even worse on the Internet for free.
So things like a fictional child sex ring in a DC pizzeria get circulated and believe by a certain percentage of people.
This isn't even the worse thing and the fact that certain targets get truly brutal layers of lies piled up on them starts to have a significant impact.
We have people who just believe things that don't have any basis in reality at all.
No one has tried to take everyone's guns away.
No one has ever said you can't say Merry Christmas if you want.
Immigrants and refugees don't get an all expense paid life in these United States.
Fraudulent voters are almost non-existent.
Climate change is not a Chinese hoax.
Islam is a religion,
Not all Muslims are terrorists.
The list goes on and on.
Oftentimes you see a lie promulgated with something that says "share this if you want to fix it". Well it wasn't actually broken in the first place.
Americans need to wake up and face reality. Its not as bad as your delusions.
Sunday, December 11, 2016
Rich Getting Richer
Ultimately, the Rich getting Richer is pretty much the norm in the world. Wealthy people have the resources to both invest and time and influence. If I need support to win an election, I may get a lot of small donations, but a few really big ones is so much easier.
Of course you can also use your own wealth if you are so inclined pretty much assured that it will pay off in the long or not so long run. Very few politicians end up poor, at least none I ever hear of. Its pretty easy to use influence to impact your future and whether anything is wrong with that certainly depends on your outlook.
This is nothing new and the real trickle down theory goes way back to ancient times. The ones who get closest tend to do the best and you see rich and powerful people surrounded by sycophants hoping to get some of the wealth and power.
Its so ingrained into our nature that you can see that behavior in anthropological studies where the best hunters got to dole out the kills in return for favors. Of course these were generally men and the women traded in a different commodity.
It should be noted that there was a time in this country where many big companies were privately held. In those cases of course the wealthy owners might have made decisions based on his or her particular preferences. There is a story about Milton Hershey in which he rejected a chance to buy a machine that would have replaced 500 workers because he didn't want the workers to lose their jobs. That sort of decision is not possible in a publicly held corporation where you have to deal with fiduciary responsibilities to your stockholders.
Now new jobs and industries do get created, generally as small businesses, which sometimes grow into significant enterprises. The vast majority of these small business either fail or stay small, but a few do succeed.
However, to think that the industries that once existed are magically going to reappear ignores reality and logic. Why would a wealthy person build a 1950s style factory?
The two biggest trends in manufacturing has been automation and outsourcing. Both of these result is fewer jobs since the outsourcing leads to efficient production of parts and the automation replaces workers.
In fact the supply chain uses their own automation further reducing jobs.
Giving wealthy people more money will result in investment, just not very many jobs, at least not the old manufacturing ones.
Of course you can also use your own wealth if you are so inclined pretty much assured that it will pay off in the long or not so long run. Very few politicians end up poor, at least none I ever hear of. Its pretty easy to use influence to impact your future and whether anything is wrong with that certainly depends on your outlook.
This is nothing new and the real trickle down theory goes way back to ancient times. The ones who get closest tend to do the best and you see rich and powerful people surrounded by sycophants hoping to get some of the wealth and power.
Its so ingrained into our nature that you can see that behavior in anthropological studies where the best hunters got to dole out the kills in return for favors. Of course these were generally men and the women traded in a different commodity.
It should be noted that there was a time in this country where many big companies were privately held. In those cases of course the wealthy owners might have made decisions based on his or her particular preferences. There is a story about Milton Hershey in which he rejected a chance to buy a machine that would have replaced 500 workers because he didn't want the workers to lose their jobs. That sort of decision is not possible in a publicly held corporation where you have to deal with fiduciary responsibilities to your stockholders.
Now new jobs and industries do get created, generally as small businesses, which sometimes grow into significant enterprises. The vast majority of these small business either fail or stay small, but a few do succeed.
However, to think that the industries that once existed are magically going to reappear ignores reality and logic. Why would a wealthy person build a 1950s style factory?
The two biggest trends in manufacturing has been automation and outsourcing. Both of these result is fewer jobs since the outsourcing leads to efficient production of parts and the automation replaces workers.
In fact the supply chain uses their own automation further reducing jobs.
Giving wealthy people more money will result in investment, just not very many jobs, at least not the old manufacturing ones.
Saturday, December 10, 2016
Voting
In America today we have one party that is intent on making voting difficult. They argue a concern for voter fraud, although very little voter fraud has been found in the current era and impose retrictions that poorer less educated people have trouble meeting.
On the other hand some want to make voting as easy as possible to get more participation and a more democratic outcome.
It has certain racial and economic overtones, and the people who want to impose barriers feel that their supporters are more likely to meet them. This is very similar to the concept that was behind Jim Crow laws in the south which were set just high enough to allow the "right" people to run things.
The fact that we have a republic and an electoral college reflects the fact that this mind set is as old as America is. Property owners were worried about the rabble who had no stake in the country and might overrun it.
This is why Democracy is scary. Realistically we all know people who shouldn't get to decide the country's future. Who those people are sometimes depends on your viewpoint, but if we are a democracy we have to roll the dice.
One thing that is destructive to the running of a country is the factions that exist. In other words, having parties that decide things that the party supports instead of what the country needs or the majority support.
For example, the majority of the country is in favor of reasonable gun control, but the gun lobby has a lot of influence. Similarly, most of the country supports LGBT rights but Evangelical have significant influence in one of the parties.
With the States and the gerrymandering that goes on, the majority opinions and views get way laid by the system.The recent election cycle showed the problems with party politics and in response we see reactions in both parties because the people are frustrated. Of course different people are frustrated in different ways, but the outcomes we get are ultimately satisfying to no one except the special interests and professional politicians.
In some ways the election of an outsider to be President is a good sign, but his ability to actually influence things is questionable. What is probably sad about this is that the person elected is likely the least qualified person possible, and unlikely to have much real influence on what happens.
The only real solution would be to put significant policy positions to the public for mandatory voting. Of course the odds of this happening in this country are remote and the system would need to be well designed to expedite it. Its a shame that we have instituted a system that has legalized a two party system making every election about party more than issues.
I'll discus this further in the future, but what we have now is now really working for most, just the insiders.
On the other hand some want to make voting as easy as possible to get more participation and a more democratic outcome.
It has certain racial and economic overtones, and the people who want to impose barriers feel that their supporters are more likely to meet them. This is very similar to the concept that was behind Jim Crow laws in the south which were set just high enough to allow the "right" people to run things.
The fact that we have a republic and an electoral college reflects the fact that this mind set is as old as America is. Property owners were worried about the rabble who had no stake in the country and might overrun it.
This is why Democracy is scary. Realistically we all know people who shouldn't get to decide the country's future. Who those people are sometimes depends on your viewpoint, but if we are a democracy we have to roll the dice.
One thing that is destructive to the running of a country is the factions that exist. In other words, having parties that decide things that the party supports instead of what the country needs or the majority support.
For example, the majority of the country is in favor of reasonable gun control, but the gun lobby has a lot of influence. Similarly, most of the country supports LGBT rights but Evangelical have significant influence in one of the parties.
With the States and the gerrymandering that goes on, the majority opinions and views get way laid by the system.The recent election cycle showed the problems with party politics and in response we see reactions in both parties because the people are frustrated. Of course different people are frustrated in different ways, but the outcomes we get are ultimately satisfying to no one except the special interests and professional politicians.
In some ways the election of an outsider to be President is a good sign, but his ability to actually influence things is questionable. What is probably sad about this is that the person elected is likely the least qualified person possible, and unlikely to have much real influence on what happens.
The only real solution would be to put significant policy positions to the public for mandatory voting. Of course the odds of this happening in this country are remote and the system would need to be well designed to expedite it. Its a shame that we have instituted a system that has legalized a two party system making every election about party more than issues.
I'll discus this further in the future, but what we have now is now really working for most, just the insiders.
Friday, December 9, 2016
Roman Republic
We tend to think of the Roman Empire when we think of Rome but Rome was a Republic for more of its history than it was an Empire.
From its founding to shortly before the start of the Christian era it was primarily a Republic but there are sources that discuss this.
https://www.britannica.com/place/Roman-Republic
It also should be noted that it was during this period that most of the expansion took place.
The Republic persisted for about 500 years before it became an empire. It eventually gave way to the prestige of military leaders who maintained the vestiges of the Republic but used force and brute force to silence any opposition.
Now Rome had achieved great things and by the time it became an Empire it totally dominated the Mediterranean world.
The Republic didn't fall because it was conquered or destroyed by external forces, more that it became factional and that instead of pursuing a common good, it devolved into groups intent on winning.
Now it was never idyllic, no place is, but it did have strong Republican traditions and gave the people a voice in the decisions of the state.
Now the problems of the Republic consisted of high taxes, collected unfairly, high crime and political corruption which led to the popularity of Julius Caesar who promised effectively to solve the problems and restore the glory of the Republic.
His popularity and flaunting of certain traditions led to his assassination and the end of the Republic.
Now this is history and its important to pay attention to it.
We don't want to repeat it.
From its founding to shortly before the start of the Christian era it was primarily a Republic but there are sources that discuss this.
https://www.britannica.com/place/Roman-Republic
It also should be noted that it was during this period that most of the expansion took place.
The Republic persisted for about 500 years before it became an empire. It eventually gave way to the prestige of military leaders who maintained the vestiges of the Republic but used force and brute force to silence any opposition.
Now Rome had achieved great things and by the time it became an Empire it totally dominated the Mediterranean world.
The Republic didn't fall because it was conquered or destroyed by external forces, more that it became factional and that instead of pursuing a common good, it devolved into groups intent on winning.
Now it was never idyllic, no place is, but it did have strong Republican traditions and gave the people a voice in the decisions of the state.
Now the problems of the Republic consisted of high taxes, collected unfairly, high crime and political corruption which led to the popularity of Julius Caesar who promised effectively to solve the problems and restore the glory of the Republic.
His popularity and flaunting of certain traditions led to his assassination and the end of the Republic.
Now this is history and its important to pay attention to it.
We don't want to repeat it.
Thursday, December 8, 2016
Economic Rise and Fall
There is a very basic rule governing economic activity which is that all other things being equal, the activity will be done as efficiently as possible.
Its just common sense that the ones who can produce things cheaper will do better than their competitors. Now, when what is now referred to as the rust belt became prosperous it had many economic advantages, cheap immigrant labor, cheap transportation, abundant resources to utilize for production and easy access to a growing market as America expanded. So we saw the rise of American manufacturing which surpassed what was being done in Europe to enable a period of American dominance.
As the labor component got more expensive and some trade barriers were removed we saw the economic activity relocate to more efficient areas, both inside and outside the country. This is exacerbated by the fact that in addition automation further reduced the number of jobs needed so those two factors resulted in significantly reduced opportunities in this area.
This is all part of a natural cycle which repeats throughout history. Reversing it or even slowing it requires an inefficient use of resources that hurts many more economically than the few it helps. For many years we saw labor rules on railroads keep that industry from competing for passenger traffic in this country.
What has to happen is that the economic climate becomes favorable to a new or old industry that will capitalize on the new conditions in the area. This of course can be any number of things, innovation is not something that can be easily predicted, and it may be that the standard of living in those areas has to be rebuilt from a lower base.
However, fighting the natural selection process of economics is not a good economic strategy.
Preparing for the future is.
Its just common sense that the ones who can produce things cheaper will do better than their competitors. Now, when what is now referred to as the rust belt became prosperous it had many economic advantages, cheap immigrant labor, cheap transportation, abundant resources to utilize for production and easy access to a growing market as America expanded. So we saw the rise of American manufacturing which surpassed what was being done in Europe to enable a period of American dominance.
As the labor component got more expensive and some trade barriers were removed we saw the economic activity relocate to more efficient areas, both inside and outside the country. This is exacerbated by the fact that in addition automation further reduced the number of jobs needed so those two factors resulted in significantly reduced opportunities in this area.
This is all part of a natural cycle which repeats throughout history. Reversing it or even slowing it requires an inefficient use of resources that hurts many more economically than the few it helps. For many years we saw labor rules on railroads keep that industry from competing for passenger traffic in this country.
What has to happen is that the economic climate becomes favorable to a new or old industry that will capitalize on the new conditions in the area. This of course can be any number of things, innovation is not something that can be easily predicted, and it may be that the standard of living in those areas has to be rebuilt from a lower base.
However, fighting the natural selection process of economics is not a good economic strategy.
Preparing for the future is.
Wednesday, December 7, 2016
Playing Chicken
One of the things type A people do is play chicken.
Now the simple object is to see who blinks first.
You can simply stare down an opponent or you can engage in completely reckless behavior until one decides its not worth it.
Now the idea is to determine dominance and probably goes back to our primate roots.
We see this type of behavior in our ape cousins as they engage in displays trying to make opponents back down.
Its a way to win using psychological intimidation without actual physical harm.
Until neither side backs down.
Chicken is successful if one side or the other backs down.
If both refuse to back down the only available outcome is physical confrontation.
Now physical confrontation isn't the object of the game, and if it come to that the game has failed.
It works best when one side has all the advantages and knows the other side couldn't possibly engage in a confrontation.
Its pretty common in things like construction where often the deal is so important that demands can be made and generally accepted.
Of course it doesn't always work there and it ends up with labor disputes, but in general in that world, money is the driving factor and both sides come around fairly quickly.
Of course in the international arena its not as successful.
It has quite serious consequences when neither side backs down. We like to call it brinkmanship in that arena, although its really the same old game of chicken.
The problem with it is that it only has to fail one time.
Now the simple object is to see who blinks first.
You can simply stare down an opponent or you can engage in completely reckless behavior until one decides its not worth it.
Now the idea is to determine dominance and probably goes back to our primate roots.
We see this type of behavior in our ape cousins as they engage in displays trying to make opponents back down.
Its a way to win using psychological intimidation without actual physical harm.
Until neither side backs down.
Chicken is successful if one side or the other backs down.
If both refuse to back down the only available outcome is physical confrontation.
Now physical confrontation isn't the object of the game, and if it come to that the game has failed.
It works best when one side has all the advantages and knows the other side couldn't possibly engage in a confrontation.
Its pretty common in things like construction where often the deal is so important that demands can be made and generally accepted.
Of course it doesn't always work there and it ends up with labor disputes, but in general in that world, money is the driving factor and both sides come around fairly quickly.
Of course in the international arena its not as successful.
It has quite serious consequences when neither side backs down. We like to call it brinkmanship in that arena, although its really the same old game of chicken.
The problem with it is that it only has to fail one time.
Tuesday, December 6, 2016
Fantasy in Action
We live in an era when many people have become unable to distinguish between reality and fantasy. Sadly, it seems like our new administration lives more in the fantasy world than in the real one.
First, the general concept that they won by a "landslide" is simply ludicrous. They lost the popular vote and while they did carry lots of states in the middle of the country with small populations, they lost both coasts and the win in the critical few swing states of Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin was less than 100,000.
Not quite a mandate.
Second, at least some, if not all of the new administration subscribe to theories promoted on fake news sites. Now maybe this is simply a cynical thing or maybe not, but to promote the idea that an opponent is running a child sex ring our of a pizzeria in Washington D.C. is not just outrageous, its pure fantasy.
Similarly, the multiple lies that were promulgated during the last couple of years have been retweeted and maybe believed by more of them then I could have imagined.
The views concerning trade deals and loss of jobs ignore the very real cause of increased automation and productivity that makes bringing those jobs back impossible. The only logical goal would be to invest in and encourage new industries to create new opportunities.
Thinking that a president could impose punitive tariffs on specific companies that displeased him shows an utter fantastical idea of how that process works and the due process provisions of the constitution.
Thinking that we live in an age when other countries will simply do what we say, which has never been the case, shows a total fantasy view of foreign relations.
The list goes on and the problem is that the isues that the country faces are some real ones and require a foundation in reality to deal with.
Now, I was pretty sure until recently that the election rhetoric was just that, a callous attempt to con the American voters by a cynical egotist.
That was the good view, since it would mean once elected the policies would revert to real world ones.
However, I'm not so sure anymore and think we might actually have leaders who really don't get it.
First, the general concept that they won by a "landslide" is simply ludicrous. They lost the popular vote and while they did carry lots of states in the middle of the country with small populations, they lost both coasts and the win in the critical few swing states of Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin was less than 100,000.
Not quite a mandate.
Second, at least some, if not all of the new administration subscribe to theories promoted on fake news sites. Now maybe this is simply a cynical thing or maybe not, but to promote the idea that an opponent is running a child sex ring our of a pizzeria in Washington D.C. is not just outrageous, its pure fantasy.
Similarly, the multiple lies that were promulgated during the last couple of years have been retweeted and maybe believed by more of them then I could have imagined.
The views concerning trade deals and loss of jobs ignore the very real cause of increased automation and productivity that makes bringing those jobs back impossible. The only logical goal would be to invest in and encourage new industries to create new opportunities.
Thinking that a president could impose punitive tariffs on specific companies that displeased him shows an utter fantastical idea of how that process works and the due process provisions of the constitution.
Thinking that we live in an age when other countries will simply do what we say, which has never been the case, shows a total fantasy view of foreign relations.
The list goes on and the problem is that the isues that the country faces are some real ones and require a foundation in reality to deal with.
Now, I was pretty sure until recently that the election rhetoric was just that, a callous attempt to con the American voters by a cynical egotist.
That was the good view, since it would mean once elected the policies would revert to real world ones.
However, I'm not so sure anymore and think we might actually have leaders who really don't get it.
Monday, December 5, 2016
Winter is Coming!
Besides being the phrase used by the house of Stark in Game of Thrones, it is actually coming.
Of course it is generally a bigger deal for those in the northern states than in the southern ones, and there are some indications that is getting off to a nasty start.
In addition we are entering a new political environment where many of our fellow citizens and residents are facing a political winter as we elected people who are going to favor wealthy investors and elites over struggling people.
Now some would argue that the middle class is going to be favored, and since to some extent the future is uncertain we can have differences of opinion. Of course the announced policies are almost guaranteed to prevent people in general from advancing into the middle class, since the tax benefits will not offset the things that define it, such as home ownership and a good job.
Interest rates will rise and are rising as the promised tax breaks and deficit spending will drive up the cost of credit and ultimately undermine the dollar, making mortgages unaffordable for many.
While some jobs may be created if we get infrastructure projects, the idea that millions of good paying manufacturing jobs are returning is demonstrably false, because even if the factories were to re-open at considerable cost, the jobs would be mostly done by robots and automation.
Of course you can believe otherwise and while you hope Santa will be good to you this year, we are entering a period of cold economic reality which is going to benefit wealthy investors and business owners while the rest of the population sits next to the table waiting for scraps from their plates.
Guess that rub on the belly made you happy anyway.
Of course it is generally a bigger deal for those in the northern states than in the southern ones, and there are some indications that is getting off to a nasty start.
In addition we are entering a new political environment where many of our fellow citizens and residents are facing a political winter as we elected people who are going to favor wealthy investors and elites over struggling people.
Now some would argue that the middle class is going to be favored, and since to some extent the future is uncertain we can have differences of opinion. Of course the announced policies are almost guaranteed to prevent people in general from advancing into the middle class, since the tax benefits will not offset the things that define it, such as home ownership and a good job.
Interest rates will rise and are rising as the promised tax breaks and deficit spending will drive up the cost of credit and ultimately undermine the dollar, making mortgages unaffordable for many.
While some jobs may be created if we get infrastructure projects, the idea that millions of good paying manufacturing jobs are returning is demonstrably false, because even if the factories were to re-open at considerable cost, the jobs would be mostly done by robots and automation.
Of course you can believe otherwise and while you hope Santa will be good to you this year, we are entering a period of cold economic reality which is going to benefit wealthy investors and business owners while the rest of the population sits next to the table waiting for scraps from their plates.
Guess that rub on the belly made you happy anyway.
Sunday, December 4, 2016
No Editors
Before social media, most of what the public saw went through a process where it was reviewed for grammar, style and correctness by editors. This might have viewed as censorship by some, but things which were clearly not true or at least not supportable didn't get into mainstream publications, and were relegated to certain sensational publications.
You might read an article about the possibility of alien life on other planets, but generally not much on actual alien abductions except as an aside if a person used it as an alibi or some other reason.
Now, of course if you believe alien abductions are real and happening all the time, this would be considered censorship but since in general they have no real evidence supporting them they didn't get past the editor.
With the Internet and social media a lot of that filter is disappearing. Now maybe from a free speech point of view but since Internet sites make money based on how frequently the site is visited (clicks) we have a race on to come out with the most outlandish headlines possible. Further, site that post false and misleading stories gain a certain credibility because they get a lot of traffic.
Now the amount of bad information on many sites reached a crescendo during the past election. Unfortunately, most people don't seem to have an internal editor that can filter truth from fiction. Further, because lies are spread so easily, outlandish things that are true seem more normal.
Take lies concerning the Clinton foundation and allegations that it launders money to the Clinton's. This is demonstrably false since they publish detailed financial reports and any such action would be easily discovered. However the lie was persistent and offset the real facts about the Trump foundation which were actual violation if relatively minor.
I am not going to list all the false allegations, it would take too long and is sort of a moot point, but these things were widely available on social media and believed by far too many people.
Lets face it, we as a country are filled with very gullible people who think aliens are coming to take them away and the Government is coming for their guns.
Saturday, December 3, 2016
Mr Robot
While this was the name of a critically acclaimed TV series, I'm not going to talk about that today. Instead, this is the name of the people who will do most of the jobs that require little skill or independence.
We have already seen millions and millions of these jobs disappear and will continue to see more go. In all honesty the jobs they take weren't good jobs except for the fact that they paid a decent wage in some cases.
We know the drudgery of working on assembly line was one of the iconic images of the past century and while providing jobs and product led to lots of related issues.
We are transitioning to a world where humans are going to have to exercise judgment and expertise while the brainless jobs are automated. This has some great advantages which are concentrated in our tech centers, like Silicon valley while hurting our rust belt as well as people everywhere who don't have sufficient skills.
The absence of a typing pool eliminates lots of jobs that used to require an easily acquired skill but has eliminated a mind killing occupation. Similarly assembly lines were people were treated like automatons have disappeared and are being done by actual automatons.
Its prevalent in many industries and is leading to certain difficult transitions as the new skills required are not possessed by many of the displaced.
New jobs which require humans to exhibit human qualities such as judgment will replace the jobs that are gone. This is the future that was predicted in a lot of sci-fi and futurist predictions of course offset by the future in which the machines become dominant. Let's hope we can avoid "The Matrix" or "The Terminator" type scenario and have robots that make everyone's life easier.
Now the people who will live in this new future need to be prepared for it, learning how to exercise judgment and analytical skills. Others, may have to perform more menial tasks
Barring some apocalyptic style event that pushes humanity back into a dark age, the future is a wonderful place where Mr. Robot is there to make things easier and better.
Preventing it or reversing it is neither desireable nor possible and trying to will only provide other countries with opportunities to surpass us.
We have already seen millions and millions of these jobs disappear and will continue to see more go. In all honesty the jobs they take weren't good jobs except for the fact that they paid a decent wage in some cases.
We know the drudgery of working on assembly line was one of the iconic images of the past century and while providing jobs and product led to lots of related issues.
We are transitioning to a world where humans are going to have to exercise judgment and expertise while the brainless jobs are automated. This has some great advantages which are concentrated in our tech centers, like Silicon valley while hurting our rust belt as well as people everywhere who don't have sufficient skills.
The absence of a typing pool eliminates lots of jobs that used to require an easily acquired skill but has eliminated a mind killing occupation. Similarly assembly lines were people were treated like automatons have disappeared and are being done by actual automatons.
Its prevalent in many industries and is leading to certain difficult transitions as the new skills required are not possessed by many of the displaced.
New jobs which require humans to exhibit human qualities such as judgment will replace the jobs that are gone. This is the future that was predicted in a lot of sci-fi and futurist predictions of course offset by the future in which the machines become dominant. Let's hope we can avoid "The Matrix" or "The Terminator" type scenario and have robots that make everyone's life easier.
Now the people who will live in this new future need to be prepared for it, learning how to exercise judgment and analytical skills. Others, may have to perform more menial tasks
Barring some apocalyptic style event that pushes humanity back into a dark age, the future is a wonderful place where Mr. Robot is there to make things easier and better.
Preventing it or reversing it is neither desireable nor possible and trying to will only provide other countries with opportunities to surpass us.
Friday, December 2, 2016
Saving Jobs
Oddly, using Government money to stimulate the economy by paying a company to keep jobs is considered OK by conservatives, but giving that same money to poor people isn't.
Now both create a stimulus to the economy and both are Government handouts. The difference is that the company is a profit making enterprise and the additional profits from the Government handouts turn into shareholder value. Yes the people working get paid and spend money in the economy which are good things and in general saving jobs is a good thing. It just sort hypocritical for a conservative to be willing to take taxpayer money and give it to another private enterprise since that's one of the main things they object to.
Now I'm in favor of Government stimulating the economy and think it is an appropriate way to spend some Government money. I also think getting industry to pick up some of the cost is also a good thing. However, infrastructure projects that also benefit the general population who are paying taxes seems better to me than subsidizing private shareholders.
Private enterprise has an obligation to its owners which in the case of publicly held companies turns out to be shareholders. So where they locate a job has to depend on what location is most profitable. If the math says the profit would be greater moving jobs to Mexico, that is what will happen. In fact, failure to protect stockholders interests is something that can result in lawsuits over failure to exercise fiduciary responsibility.
What this tells e is that since the fundamental math wasn't changed long term, those jobs will eventually move, once the coast is clear if the economics don't change.
Now, economics tells us that finding the most efficient solution is ultimately the best solution since it maximizes resource use and benefits society as a whole. Of course society as a whole is not any particular individual who can be devastated by an economic decision.
What then is the Government's role? In a free market economy its to let the market forces work. As Americans we generally believe in that. Now in addition, there are things Government can do to help displaced workers adjust via unemployment insurance, health care and re-education. Ultimately however, the displaced workers are responsible to adapt and develop new skills.
The alternative is a Government controlled economy or planned economy which is more of a socialist or communist approach. It did fit into National Socialism, which believes in subjugating everything to State control with cooperation from industry.
We seem to have started down that path.
Now both create a stimulus to the economy and both are Government handouts. The difference is that the company is a profit making enterprise and the additional profits from the Government handouts turn into shareholder value. Yes the people working get paid and spend money in the economy which are good things and in general saving jobs is a good thing. It just sort hypocritical for a conservative to be willing to take taxpayer money and give it to another private enterprise since that's one of the main things they object to.
Now I'm in favor of Government stimulating the economy and think it is an appropriate way to spend some Government money. I also think getting industry to pick up some of the cost is also a good thing. However, infrastructure projects that also benefit the general population who are paying taxes seems better to me than subsidizing private shareholders.
Private enterprise has an obligation to its owners which in the case of publicly held companies turns out to be shareholders. So where they locate a job has to depend on what location is most profitable. If the math says the profit would be greater moving jobs to Mexico, that is what will happen. In fact, failure to protect stockholders interests is something that can result in lawsuits over failure to exercise fiduciary responsibility.
What this tells e is that since the fundamental math wasn't changed long term, those jobs will eventually move, once the coast is clear if the economics don't change.
Now, economics tells us that finding the most efficient solution is ultimately the best solution since it maximizes resource use and benefits society as a whole. Of course society as a whole is not any particular individual who can be devastated by an economic decision.
What then is the Government's role? In a free market economy its to let the market forces work. As Americans we generally believe in that. Now in addition, there are things Government can do to help displaced workers adjust via unemployment insurance, health care and re-education. Ultimately however, the displaced workers are responsible to adapt and develop new skills.
The alternative is a Government controlled economy or planned economy which is more of a socialist or communist approach. It did fit into National Socialism, which believes in subjugating everything to State control with cooperation from industry.
We seem to have started down that path.
Thursday, December 1, 2016
Simple Math
The concept of supply side economics is actually quite simple. If you reduce the cost to suppliers, they will reduce the cost to consumers. Consumers will then buy more requiring the suppliers to hire more people. This increases disposable income leading to more consumption, more hiring, etc. etc. The increased economic activity will replace any lost taxes since while everyone is paying a lower percentage, the total pie is so much bigger.
Now the logic is really the same as a pyramid scheme and the ultimate issue with a pyramid scheme is that the number of potential members is ultimately limited. When a pyramid runs out of new members it can't pay the latest members and it starts to collapse.
Supply side economics is limited by the amount of consumption that can be created. Take a commodity like oil. We've seen oil prices plunge based on a supply glut. This has resulted in some increase in consumption but not enough to bring the prices back up. Maybe over a longer cycle, if people were convinced that oil would stay cheap they might design additional uses for it into products, but that isn't easy or even likely since the market is volatile. The reaction has been a decrease in non-competitive oil production leading to reverses in economic booms in some states and countries.
There is no such thing as unlimited consumption. Supply side can be used when there is untapped consumption and unused capacity to absorb the increased output and provide jobs for underutilized employees. However in the absence of those two things it creates something of a bubble, and increases the deficit in two ways.
First you have the initial tax abatement's which are simple subtractions. Now these are supposed to be replace by the increased taxes based on the increased economic activity and if that actually happens we have a minor miracle. However, to some extent, because of the pyramid nature of supply side, it creates a bubble that leads to bankruptcies, defaults, unemployment and increased Government expenditures for unemployment insurance, stimulus and reduced tax revenues.
We had a good example of this in the financial crisis where supply side applied to cheap mortgage credit led to the inevitable bubble and impacted everybody.
Now some elements of supply side have their place, especially when there is unmet demand and production capacity available. However the precision needed to use it is generally not something Government does well.
So if we actually proceed down this path, one can ride the wave up but realize that you are definitely going to wipe out if you stay in too long.
Now the logic is really the same as a pyramid scheme and the ultimate issue with a pyramid scheme is that the number of potential members is ultimately limited. When a pyramid runs out of new members it can't pay the latest members and it starts to collapse.
Supply side economics is limited by the amount of consumption that can be created. Take a commodity like oil. We've seen oil prices plunge based on a supply glut. This has resulted in some increase in consumption but not enough to bring the prices back up. Maybe over a longer cycle, if people were convinced that oil would stay cheap they might design additional uses for it into products, but that isn't easy or even likely since the market is volatile. The reaction has been a decrease in non-competitive oil production leading to reverses in economic booms in some states and countries.
There is no such thing as unlimited consumption. Supply side can be used when there is untapped consumption and unused capacity to absorb the increased output and provide jobs for underutilized employees. However in the absence of those two things it creates something of a bubble, and increases the deficit in two ways.
First you have the initial tax abatement's which are simple subtractions. Now these are supposed to be replace by the increased taxes based on the increased economic activity and if that actually happens we have a minor miracle. However, to some extent, because of the pyramid nature of supply side, it creates a bubble that leads to bankruptcies, defaults, unemployment and increased Government expenditures for unemployment insurance, stimulus and reduced tax revenues.
We had a good example of this in the financial crisis where supply side applied to cheap mortgage credit led to the inevitable bubble and impacted everybody.
Now some elements of supply side have their place, especially when there is unmet demand and production capacity available. However the precision needed to use it is generally not something Government does well.
So if we actually proceed down this path, one can ride the wave up but realize that you are definitely going to wipe out if you stay in too long.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)