<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Detailed Abstractions &#187; Unemployment</title>
	<atom:link href="http://detailedabstractions.com/tag/unemployment/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://detailedabstractions.com</link>
	<description>Pathologically Pro-Freedom</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Aug 2011 23:31:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
		<item>
		<title>Infinite Monkey Theorems</title>
		<link>http://detailedabstractions.com/2011/01/27/infinite-monkey-theorems-3/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=infinite-monkey-theorems-3</link>
		<comments>http://detailedabstractions.com/2011/01/27/infinite-monkey-theorems-3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Jan 2011 20:53:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael S. Langston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Critical Thinking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Culture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Environmentalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Foreign Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Military]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NGOs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Quotations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cato]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CBO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Milton Friedman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President Brack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State of the Union]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Economist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unemployment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://detailedabstractions.com/?p=2040</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Around the web :: US Spy gets 32 years - possibly reason China has stealth fighter :: unemployment claims up :: CBO warns about social security - President doesn't mention it during speech :: Economist and an Idea Arena]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div id="attachment_1980" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 220px"><a href="http://detailedabstractions.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/monkey_typewriter.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-1980  " title="Infinite Monkey Theorems" src="http://detailedabstractions.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/monkey_typewriter.jpg" alt="Monkey @ Typewritter - doing better than most journalists" width="210" height="135" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Infinite Monkey Theorems</p></div>
<p style="text-align: center;"> </p>
<p style="text-align: center;">Things worth reading&#8230;   </p>
<p style="text-align: center;">or at least pondering and forgetting quickly&#8230; </p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><strong> </strong></p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><strong> </strong></p>
<p style="text-align: left;"> </p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><strong>So&#8230;</strong> how good is <a title="China conducts first test-flight of stealth plane" href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12159571" target="_blank">China’s new stealth fighter</a>?  Not sure, but I&#8217;d start by asking this guy(<a title="Engineer gets 32 years for selling secrets to China" href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41249426/ns/us_news-security/" target="_blank">here</a> via MSNBC): </p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">HONOLULU — A former B-2 stealth bomber engineer was sentenced to 32 years in prison Monday for selling military secrets to China in the latest of several high-profile cases of Chinese espionage in the U.S.</p>
<p><strong>US economics</strong>&#8230;</p>
<p style="text-align: left;"><strong>Businesses</strong> have not yet started hiring as UE claims are up.  Some of it is due to delays due to weather were people who would’ve claimed last week didn’t, but still not a good sign (<a title="U.S. jobless claims up 51,000 to 454,000" href="http://www.biztimes.com/daily/2011/1/27/us-jobless-claims-up-51000-to-454000 " target="_blank">here</a> via BizTimes.com):</p>
<p style="text-align: left; padding-left: 30px;">New applications for U.S. jobless benefits jumped by 51,000 to 454,000 last week, the U.S. Labor Department reported today, up from 403,000 during the previous week&#8230;.</p>
<p style="text-align: left; padding-left: 30px;">The four-week average of new claims, climbed 15,750 to 428,750, the highest level in two months, the Labor Department said. </p>
<p>Additionally, the <strong>CBO reported</strong> this week, what all politicians have known for decades, but have consistently ignored…. social security is a looming and ever-growing problem (<a title="Social Security to Operate in the Red for the Next 10+ Years: CBO" href="http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/content/view/50038/" target="_blank">here</a> via EpochTimes): </p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">In its Budget and Economic Outlook report for fiscal years 2011 to 2021, the CBO anticipates that the Social Security program will run a $45 billion deficit for 2011, and will be in the red for at least the next ten years. </p>
<p>And…</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">According to the Associated Press, if present Social Security spending and funding levels are sustained and adjusted for the coming influx of Baby Boomers applying for and collecting Social Security checks, the program’s trust fund could be emptied by about 2037.</p>
<p>President <strong>Obama’s thoughts</strong> about this re: State of the union speech… no problems at all… full remarks <a title="United States State of the Union Speech 2011" href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-state-union-address" target="_blank">here</a>:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Starting in 2011, we are prepared to freeze government spending for three years.  (Applause.)  Spending related to our national security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will not be affected.</p>
<p>Not &#8220;affected&#8217;?  I guess that doesn&#8217;t discount it from affecting us&#8230;. but why worry about that when we can spend more money on things we don&#8217;t need (speech cont&#8217;d):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Next, we can put Americans to work today building the infrastructure of tomorrow.  From the first railroads to the Interstate Highway System, our nation has always been built to compete.  There&#8217;s no reason Europe or China should have the fastest trains, or the new factories that manufacture clean energy products.</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Tomorrow, I&#8217;ll visit Tampa, Florida, where workers will soon break ground on a new high-speed railroad funded by the Recovery Act.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s some vision there; to ignore the looming crisis and instead deflect to a new boondoggle.  &amp; not just a boondoggle, but it seems this is the answer to so many of life&#8217;s troubles&#8230; the environment, traffic congestion, sprawl&#8230;. yes, this magical elixir that is so incredibly great, that it can&#8217;t possibly survive without federal government to operate.</p>
<p>But wait… it will create jobs!  (speech cont&#8217;d):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">There are projects like that all across this country that will create jobs and help move our nation&#8217;s goods, services, and information. </p>
<p>Of course if it’s a “jobs’ program” and not a new transportation program (look over here – shiny stuff)&#8230; well, let&#8217;s let Milton Friedman discuss jobs&#8217; programs (<a title="Miton Friedman on Canals &amp; Spoons" href="http://amateureconblog.blogspot.com/2009/05/milton-friedman-on-canals-and-spoons.html" target="_blank">here</a>):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Milton recalled traveling to an Asian country in the 1960s and visiting a worksite where a new canal was being built. He was shocked to see that, instead of modern tractors and earth movers, the workers had shovels. He asked why there were so few machines. The government bureaucrat explained: &#8216;You don&#8217;t understand. This is a jobs program.&#8217; To which Milton replied: &#8216;Oh, I thought you were trying to build a canal. If it&#8217;s jobs you want, then you should give these workers spoons, not shovels.&#8217;</p>
<p>Either way, <a title="A video response to the 2011 State of the Union" href="http://www.cato.org/weekly/index.php?vid_id=205" target="_blank">here</a> is a good response to the State of the Union from Cato.</p>
<p>Lastly, <strong>more great</strong> stuff from the Economist.  This time an <a title="Welcome to The Ideas Arena" href="http://www.economist.com/blogs/globalleadership/2011/01/introducing_ideas_arena_global_leadership" target="_blank">Ideas Arena</a></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">As business leaders, politicians and journalists meet at the World Economic Forum&#8217;s annual summit in Davos to discuss the year ahead, The Economist will be inviting readers and guests to participate in a series of online debates questioning the future of global leadership. From now until February 18th, we&#8217;ll be examining the rapid emergence of a single global elite whose decisions, and opinions, affect us all.</p>
     ]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://detailedabstractions.com/2011/01/27/infinite-monkey-theorems-3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Jobless Claims: Reality Vs. Politics</title>
		<link>http://detailedabstractions.com/2011/01/13/jobless-claims-reality-vs-politics/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=jobless-claims-reality-vs-politics</link>
		<comments>http://detailedabstractions.com/2011/01/13/jobless-claims-reality-vs-politics/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Jan 2011 21:39:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael S. Langston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Critical Thinking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trends]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama Administration. Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stimulus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unemployment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://detailedabstractions.com/?p=1842</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Obama Adminstration has been taking credit for the past month or so as unemployment rates have fallen.  However, the economics and recent uptick in UE claims, tells the real story.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>The news</strong> about falling jobless claims has been continuing over the past couple months as new claims began to fall in late November, kicking off media reports in December about how great things were trending. In fact, not only were jobless claims receding, but even the 4 week moving average (<a title="U.S. Initial Jobless Claims Drop Sharply " href="http://www.actionforex.com/analysis/daily-forex-fundamentals/u.s.-initial-jobless-claims-drop-sharply-20101230129909/" target="_blank">here</a> via ActionForex):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Initial unemployment insurance claims fell 34,000 to 388,000 for the week ending December 25th. The 4-week moving average of initial claims, a better indication of the underlying trend in labor markets, slipped to 414,000 from 426,500 the prior week&#8230;.</p>
<p>Now for those of you unfamiliar with the end of the year in the United States, there&#8217;s this little holiday known as Christmas.  &amp; with religious aspects aside, usually during Christmas in the US we see a great deal of increase employment due to need based solely upon Christmas <span style="text-decoration: line-through;">cheer</span> spending.  There are part time employees hired in all kinds of capacities such as catalog companies, larger retail stores, and even in restaurants as they see increased traffic as well.</p>
<p>Many actually interested in publishing accurate information, mentioned this repeatedly (article cont&#8217;d):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;This report needs to be viewed with a degree of caution given the significant volatility associated with the seasonal factors surrounding the Christmas holiday period and uncertainty as to whether these declines will be sustained&#8230;.</p>
<p>Other accurate voices also noted another corollary; jobless claims drop for other reasons (<a title="Job Seekers Drop Out of Job Search in December: Long Road for the Unemployed " href="http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/get-employed-terri-lee-ryan/2011/01/job-seekers-drop-out-of-job-search-in-december-long-road-for-the-unemployed.html" target="_blank">here</a> via ChicagoNow):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">The national jobless rate for December dropped to 9.4% from 9.8% the previous month.  Unfortunately, the decline in jobless claims only dropped because 260,000 American job seekers stopped looking for employment last month,&#8230;</p>
<p><strong>But you know </strong>- there&#8217;s reality &amp; then there&#8217;s politics.  So many voices, quite pleased with a minor decrease of unemployment claims and quite willing to ignore the volatile season and other factors were ready to go to work.  After all, the numbers seem good for the President (<a title="Jobless data are bright for Obama" href="http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/1210/a_happy_new_year_eac4ef65-e8c8-48b5-a1f9-b9e6613a14b7.html" target="_blank">here</a>):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">President Obama got some early New Year’s cheer Thursday — a positive report on jobless claims that increases the chances that next week will bring the first drop in the unemployment rate since June&#8230;.</p>
<p>So why shouldn&#8217;t he market the glowing numbers on his website (<a title="U.S. jobless claims hit 2-year low" href="http://barackobama-2012.blogspot.com/2010/12/us-jobless-claims-hit-2-year-low.html" target="_blank">here</a>):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">The number of Americans applying for unemployment benefits fell sharply last week, a positive sign that the U.S. job market is slowly improving&#8230;.</p>
<p>With headlines everywhere reading this is the lowest rate in jobless claims since 2008 (<a title="Lowest Jobless Claims Since July 2008" href="http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/12/lowest-jobless-claims-since-july-2008/" target="_blank">here</a> &#8211; they have pretty graphs too):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;.The traditional interpretation suggests that the U.S. labor market, which has been a headwind for the economy, is improving as the economy slowly accelerates into the new year. New applications for unemployment assistance decreased by 34,000 to 388,000 (week ending December 25th). That is the lowest level since July 2008&#8230;.</p>
<p>Prompting Mr. Obama himself to declare success (<a title="Obama Says Employment Showing `Clear' Improvement as Joblessness at 9.4%" href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-08/obama-says-u-s-employment-is-showing-clear-trend-of-improvement.html" target="_blank">here</a> via Bloomberg):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">President Barack Obama said U.S. job growth is improving after a government report showed employers added 103,000 jobs last month and the unemployment rate fell to 9.4 percent in December from 9.8 percent in November.</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">In his weekly radio and Internet address, Obama today credited steps taken by his administration to reduce taxes and encourage business investment with helping to restore economic confidence and boost hiring&#8230;.</p>
<p><strong>The problem </strong>is that none of this matches reality.<strong> </strong>As was noted by many when the unemployment numbers were looking just great&#8230;. some employees stopped looking for jobs altogether and others were hired only for seasonal work. So the natural uptick is <a title="Initial Jobless Claims Rise 35,000" href="http://www.thestreet.com/story/10972348/1/initial-jobless-claims-rise-35000.html" target="_blank">here</a> via <a title="The Street" href="http://www.thestreet.com" target="_blank">The Street</a>:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">The number of Americans filing unemployment claims unexpectedly rose last week, the Labor Department said early Thursday&#8230;.</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t misunderstand, even with the uptick in jobless claims, there are still things that seem positive overall (article cont&#8217;d):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">The four-week moving average in initial claims, which smoothes the volatility in week-to-week reports, was 416,500, an increase of 5,500 from the previous week&#8217;s revised average of 411,000&#8230;.</p>
<p>Irregardless of what politicians and pundits say (even Nobel Prize winning ones), no matter how many people, no matter their collective resumes or IQs, no matter their fervor, and even for POTUS, or the Chair of the Fed Reserve, or their positions in life don&#8217;t matter to the two, very real things we <em>actually </em>know:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">1) It&#8217;s too early to tell whether the volatility of the recent holiday season will or does have any impact on unemployment trends as a whole.</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">
2) Even if the trend holds and the President claiming credit turns out to be prescient versus premature, let&#8217;s not forget.  We spent 1 trillion more dollars to keep the unemployment rate <strong><em>below </em></strong>8% &amp; by 2011, it should be around 7% (<a title="Command &amp; Control Economy – Policies and Recommendations Oh My!" href="http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/06/06/command-control-economy-policies-and-recommendations-oh-my/" target="_blank">here</a> via DA):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 60px;">As all politicians told us not too long ago, without passing several &#8220;stimulus&#8221; bills quickly… way too quick to read (anyone remember the Patriot Act?), everyone would soon be looking for jobs as unemployment sky rockets.  Remember the 1.5 million jobs that would be saved?</p>
<p><strong>So in the end, </strong>time will tell us what we know: increased regulations and taxes strangle business and decrease job growth and economic output.</p>
<p>For now, just remember the people telling you how great US economics are trending and how responsible their policies are for these successes are still a mile behind where they told us we&#8217;d be just a couple years ago.  As one other thing we do know, we&#8217;re still doing worse off than the government told us we would be doing had they one absolutely nothing (~10% higher UE than they predicted).</p>
<p>&amp; when noting the fact that the stimulus they begged for and got; things make it look that much worse as we&#8217;re about ~50% higher than the government prediction:</p>
<div class="wp-caption aligncenter" style="width: 507px"><img class="  " title="UE Numbers - Government Projected Versus Actual" src="http://michaelscomments.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/stimulus-vs-unemployment-june2010-dots.gif" alt="UE Numbers - Government Projected Versus Actual" width="497" height="304" /><p class="wp-caption-text">Source: Michael’s Comments blog</p></div>
     ]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://detailedabstractions.com/2011/01/13/jobless-claims-reality-vs-politics/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>MIT Professor to US:  More Taxes Are Good!</title>
		<link>http://detailedabstractions.com/2010/09/15/mit-professor-to-us-more-taxes-are-good/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=mit-professor-to-us-more-taxes-are-good</link>
		<comments>http://detailedabstractions.com/2010/09/15/mit-professor-to-us-more-taxes-are-good/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Sep 2010 18:44:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael S. Langston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Free Market Principles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[People/Blogs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cash for Clunkers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cato]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CBO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MIT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national bureau of economic research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nber]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Simon Johnson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stimulus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unemployment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://detailedabstractions.com/?p=1294</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Writing in the NY Times, an MIT Professor for the Sloan School of Management, Simon Johnson explains how bad budget deficits will be if we allow the Bush tax cuts to continue.  Basically he tells us, if we fail, it will only be due to the fact that taxes aren&#8217;t high enough and we&#8217;re not spending [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Writing in the NY Times, an MIT Professor for the Sloan School of Management, Simon Johnson explains how bad budget deficits will be if we allow the Bush tax cuts to continue.  Basically he tells us, if we fail, it will only be due to the fact that taxes aren&#8217;t high enough and we&#8217;re not spending enough money on the right things. (<a title="Think Long Term" href="http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2010/09/08/mixing-economics-with-politics/think-long-term-fiscal-sustainability">here</a>):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">According to the Congressional Budget Office, extending all the Bush tax cuts would add $2.3 trillion to the total 2018 debt. The single biggest step our government could take this year to address the structural deficit would be to let the tax cuts expire. Such a credible commitment to long-term fiscal sustainability should reduce interest rates today, helping to stimulate the economy&#8230;.</p>
<p>According to Mr. Johnson, even though critics say letting the tax cuts expire would retard growth, that money could be used more effectively (he continues):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;If the goal is to boost growth and employment immediately, it would be better to let the tax cuts expire and dedicate some of the increased revenue to real stimulus programs&#8230;</p>
<p>You mean, stimulus programs like &#8220;Cash for Clunkers&#8221; (NBER working paper <a title="The Effects of Fiscal Stimulus: Evidence from the 2009 'Cash for Clunkers' Program" href="http://papers.nber.org/papers/w16351" target="_blank">here</a>)?</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;Our empirical strategy exploits variation across U.S. cities in ex-ante exposure to the program as measured by the number of “clunkers” in the city as of the summer of 2008. We find that the program induced the purchase of an additional 360,000 cars in July and August of 2009. However, almost all of the additional purchases under the program were pulled forward from the very near future; the effect of the program on auto purchases is almost completely reversed by as early as March 2010 – only seven months after the program ended&#8230;.</p>
<p>Or how about the stimulus plan we were told would keep unemployment rates to 8% (DA Post <a title="Obama to Public: If At First You Don’t Succeed, Spend More Money" href="http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/07/10/obama-to-public-if-at-first-you-dont-succeed-spend-more-money/" target="_blank">here</a>), while they currently hover around 10% (<a title="Employment Situation Summary" href="http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm" target="_blank">here</a>):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;in August, and the unemployment rate was about unchanged at 9.6 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today.</p>
<p>Or&#8230;maybe the government takeover/purchase of GM (post <a title="Should the US Government own Government Motors…. I mean GM?" href="http://detailedabstractions.com/2010/08/26/should-the-us-government-own-government-motors-i-mean-gm/" target="_blank">here</a>):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;in reality, the US Treasury through pressure by the Obama administration spent $50 billion dollars to own 61% of the shares.  With roughly 500 million shares available, this means the US government current owns 305 million shares.  At the current stock price today of .375 dollars, their 50 billion dollar investment is worth roughly 115 million dollars&#8230;.</p>
<p>Or maybe controlling healthcare costs by passing a bill no one understands&#8230;. which has already started failing as insurers have already started raising rates more than goverment predictions (post <a title="Healthcare &amp; Government Threats" href="http://detailedabstractions.com/2010/09/13/healthcare-government-threats/" target="_blank">here</a>):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;The economics and logic of these required rate increases are undeniable.  If someone, in this case the government through force of law, tells a private business that they must increase their spending, under force of law, some, if not all, of those new expenditures will be passed on to consumers&#8230;</p>
<p>So to sum up Mr. Johnson, even though evidence, extremely recent evidence, demonstrates what economic thinkers have told us for centuries:  government can not create jobs &#8211; the problem doesn&#8217;t lie with government spending, but instead in allowing people to keep their own money.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t know when we start understanding what Albert Einstein expressed so eloquently so many years ago, &#8220;The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.&#8221; but let&#8217;s hope it&#8217;s soon.</p>
<p>For more, excellent Cato article <a title="The Stimulus: The Government Job Creation Myth" href="http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=12019" target="_blank"><em>The Stimulus: The Government Job Creation Myth</em></a></p>
     ]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://detailedabstractions.com/2010/09/15/mit-professor-to-us-more-taxes-are-good/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Party of NO</title>
		<link>http://detailedabstractions.com/2010/07/19/the-party-of-no/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-party-of-no</link>
		<comments>http://detailedabstractions.com/2010/07/19/the-party-of-no/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Jul 2010 19:32:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael S. Langston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Critical Thinking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[History]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation/Deregulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bush (43) Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cato]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Clinton Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Care Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patriot Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Republicans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ron Paul]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Hill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unemployment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA Today]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://detailedabstractions.com/?p=1137</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Well, the verdict is in. The Republicans are being cast as the party of no.  The party without ideas.  The party of obstruction. Please make no mistake about it, this marketing push isn&#8217;t really about obstruction, but about the upcoming elections.  Just as President Clinton did brilliantly prior the 1996 elections when he cast all [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong><a href="http://detailedabstractions.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/S356_justsayno.jpg"><img class="alignright size-full wp-image-1140" title="S356_justsayno" src="http://detailedabstractions.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/S356_justsayno.jpg" alt="" width="192" height="189" /></a>Well, the verdict is in.</strong> The Republicans are being cast as the party of no.  The party without ideas.  The party of obstruction.</p>
<p>Please make no mistake about it, this marketing push isn&#8217;t really about obstruction, but about the upcoming elections.  Just as President Clinton did brilliantly prior the 1996 elections when he cast all Republicans as following Newt Gingrich and obstructing spending laws, the Obama administration is moving forward in much the same pattern.</p>
<p>This is possible because the White House, regardless of occupant, has historically been able to control the news cycle.  In my opinion, this should be an indictment on journalism as a whole when alternatives which exist aren&#8217;t being reported, but simply put:  when the President talks, news happens.  When your normal representative talks, you&#8217;re lucky if you even hear about it.</p>
<p>It worked during the Clinton Administration on spending, it worked during the Bush (43) Administration on the Patriot Act, &amp; it certainly might work again this time. Irregardless, the campaign is back and in high gear (<a title="Obama: Republicans choose to 'obstruct our progress'" href="http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2010/07/obama-republicans-choose-to-obstruct-our-progress/1" target="_blank">here</a> via USA Today):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;&#8221;Too often, the Republican leadership in the United States Senate chooses to filibuster our recovery and obstruct our progress,&#8221; Obama said. &#8220;And that has very real consequences.&#8221;&#8230;</p>
<p>Or <a title="The Saturday Word: Obstruction and Appointments" href="http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/17/the-saturday-word-obstruction-and-appointments/" target="_blank">here</a> via NY Times blog, <a title="Confused by the filibuster" href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/07/confused_by_the_filibuster.html" target="_blank">here</a> via WaPo, &amp; on and on and on&#8230;</p>
<p><strong>From a critical point of view</strong> however, obstructionist should not automatically be a pejorative.   Without analyzing what exactly is being obstructed, this is little more than name calling.</p>
<p>As an example, if say in the 1940s Congress was actively trying to &#8220;obstruct&#8221; the internment of thousands of innocent Japanese-Americans, this would not only be a moral good, but any thoughts to compromise solely to be seen as a non-obstructionist would be wrong.  What would be a compromised alternative?  House arrest?</p>
<p>Additionally, we have to be on the lookout for the differences between the marketing of bills and their actual language.  Think of the new health care legislation.  President Obama&#8217;s promises of more health care for all at cheaper prices, simply don&#8217;t seem to be fulfilled by the 2500 page law passed&#8230; or maybe they are being fulfilled, but like the Patriot Act, no one really knows what the new legislation actually means (<a title="Bad Medicine: A Guide to the Real Costs and Consequences of the New Health Care Law" href="http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=11961" target="_blank">here</a> via Cato):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act represents the most significant transformation of the American health care system since Medicare and Medicaid. It will fundamentally change nearly every aspect of health care, from insurance to the final delivery of care.</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">The length and complexity of the legislation, combined with a debate that often generated more heat than light, has led to massive confusion about the law&#8217;s likely impact&#8230;.</p>
<p>Or on yesterday&#8217;s Meet The Press Rep. Van Hollen stated (transcripts <a title="Meet The Press 20100718" href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38281589/ns/meet_the_press-transcripts">here</a> via MSNBC):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;The frustration is there are lots of important bills to push for jobs that are sitting over in the Senate.  But it&#8217;s not the fault of the Democratic leadership in the Senate.  I mean, frankly, you know, John Cornyn and his allies have been trying to block a whole lot of very important jobs measures.  We in fact sent a piece of legislation over very recently that would remove these perverse tax incentives to ship American jobs overseas, that give American corporations a bonus if they ship American jobs overseas&#8230;.</p>
<p>Just like health care, the basic idea that our representatives are working on private job creation incentives is a good one.  But just like the Obama Administration&#8217;s promises on health care, Rep. Van Hollen is selling us a job creation bill which has little chance of actually creating jobs.</p>
<p>To translate &#8211; what they mean by &#8220;removing incentives&#8221; is to increase taxes on businesses who outsource.  Now, some may want this to happen for various reasons, but the economics are pretty straight forward.  Tax increases have never increased jobs &amp; forcing a tax such as this could actually result in companies simply moving their head quarters as well.</p>
<p>To be fair, there are bills I don&#8217;t believe the Republicans should block, for instance the extension on unemployment benefits (though it seems likely to pass soon: <a title="Dems plan benefits vote moments after new senator is sworn in" href="http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/109581-dems-plan-benefits-vote-moments-after-new-senator-is-sworn-in" target="_blank">here</a> via The Hill).</p>
<p>Yes, the point isn&#8217;t that the Republicans are doing the right thing and the Democrats are failing at every single step, the point is only intended to remind us of the old saying about representative governance:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">The people will get the government they deserve.</p>
<p>&amp; so long as we allow marketing campaigns to have more force in elections than critical analysis does, we will likely continue to be disappointed.</p>
     ]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://detailedabstractions.com/2010/07/19/the-party-of-no/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New Definition:  Successful Stimulus Program</title>
		<link>http://detailedabstractions.com/2010/03/02/new-definition-successful-stimulus-program/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=new-definition-successful-stimulus-program</link>
		<comments>http://detailedabstractions.com/2010/03/02/new-definition-successful-stimulus-program/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2010 15:52:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael S. Langston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Care Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Housing Crisis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stimulus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unemployment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vice President Joe Biden]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://detailedabstractions.com/?p=821</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[With high levels of bipartisan anger, not only affecting elections, but affecting polls on the flagship legislation&#8230; er, I mean, the monstrous health care bill which no understands as well (here via WaPo): &#8230;A CNN poll last week found that only 25 percent of Americans want Congress to pass a health-care bill similar to the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With high levels of <a title="Voter anger is bipartisan, poll shows" href="http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2010/02/25/copy/voter-anger-is-bipartisan-poll-shows.html?sid=101" target="_blank" class="broken_link">bipartisan</a> anger, not only affecting <a title="New poll finds voter anger drove results of Mass. election" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/22/AR2010012203167.html" target="_blank">elections</a>, but affecting polls on the flagship legislation&#8230; er, I mean, the monstrous health care bill which no understands as well (<a title="Good for Obama, bad for congressional Democrats" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/01/AR2010030101223.html?hpid=opinionsbox1" target="_blank">here</a> via WaPo):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;A CNN poll last week found that only 25 percent of Americans want Congress to pass a health-care bill similar to the one it has been working on for the past year, while 73 percent say Congress should either start from scratch or not pass health-care legislation at all (other polls show support for the bill in the low 40s). &#8230;</p>
<p>The White House is once again, on a media blitz to prove the administrations&#8217; efficacy and job one is selling the idea the simulus worked.  While they have seemed keen enough to not discuss actual housing or job numbers, but instead spend time on nebulous items such as &#8220;<a title="The Fear Based Stimulus That Wasn’t" href="http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/08/23/the-fear-based-stimulus-that-wasnt/" target="_blank">saved  jobs</a>&#8220;, they are nonetheless telling us with great frequency what the stimulus did for us.</p>
<p>Vice President Joe Biden (<a title="VP Biden: It’s Taking a While to Get U.S. Economy &quot;Out of  this Ditch&quot; but Recovery Act Is Working" href="http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/02/vp-biden-its-taking-a-while-to-get-us-economy-out-of-this-ditch-but-recovery-act-is-working.html" target="_blank">here</a> via ABC News):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Vice President Joe Biden said today that  it is &#8220;taking a while&#8221; for the nation’s economy to &#8220;get out of this  ditch&#8221; but credited the Obama Administration’s stimulus legislation,  enacted one year ago, for laying a foundation for long-term economic  growth. &#8230;</p>
<p>As well as President Obama himself (<a title="Obama hails stimulus effect, says more work  ahead" href="http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2010/02/obama-hails-stimulus-effect-says-more-work-ahead/1" target="_blank">here</a> via USA Today):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">President Obama credits the one-year-old  economic stimulus legislation with staving off a second depression &#8230;</p>
<p>The President even sent high level officials all over the  country to prove the stimulus worked.  In one case, they used  construction for residential housing to spotlight the great work the  stimulus package has done for Cincinnati (<a title="Obama stimulus tour touts Avondale housing" href="http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20100218/BIZ01/2180355/1001/BIZ/Obama+stimulus+tour+touts+Avondale+housing" target="_blank">here </a>via Cincinnati.com).</p>
<p><strong>With </strong>unemployment numbers continuing to rise (UE Rate for January 2010 10.6%)</p>
<p><a href="http://detailedabstractions.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/UEChart.png"><img title="UEChart" src="http://detailedabstractions.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/UEChart.png" alt="" width="160" height="101" /></a></p>
<p><strong>&amp; </strong>defaults on existing mortgages doing the same (<a title="Exclusive: Mortgage delinquencies rise after Q4  plateau" href="http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE62053E20100301">here</a> via Reuters):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;More than 8 percent  of homeowners were behind 30  days or more on their mortgage loans, up  4.4 percent from December 2009  and 21 percent from last January&#8230;</p>
<p><strong>&amp; </strong>just like the last media blitz the White House went on  to   prove the stimulus was working (<a title="The Fear  Based Stimulus That   Wasn’t" href="http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/08/23/the-fear-based-stimulus-that-wasnt/" target="_blank">here </a>via DA), they have spent approximately 34% of   the money they  claimed to need originally (<a title="Stimulus Spending    Hits $272 Billion—34 Percent of Total" href="http://www.propublica.org/ion/stimulus/item/stimulus-spending-hits-272-billion-34-percent-of-total-209" target="_blank">here</a> via ProPublica).  Combining the money spent   and tax cuts approved  listed on Recovery.gov they find:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;the  government has now moved at  least $272 billion into the  economy, or  34  percent of the total amount  approved by Congress last  February&#8230;.</p>
<p>So there you have it.  Successful stimulus program is now defined as a jobless, homeless, shaky recovery, for which the majority of the money requested has yet to have been spent.</p>
     ]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://detailedabstractions.com/2010/03/02/new-definition-successful-stimulus-program/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic (User agent is rejected)
Page Caching using disk: enhanced (User agent is rejected)
Object Caching 7472/7528 objects using disk: basic

Served from: detailedabstractions.com @ 2012-02-08 08:03:29 -->
