Music hath charms to soothe the savage breast.
Music can cast charms in three ways, evoking responses in humans that are cerebral, emotional or physical.
Cerebral music -- Bach, for example -- can evoke a physical as well as an intellectual response, as listeners tap feet, wave hands or even dance. The response is cerebral, but is manifest physically largely in the extremities.
Emotional music -- that of Beethoven, Tchaikovsky or Sousa -- engenders such romantic responses as patriotism or occasionally tears. People attach meanings to the music that the composer may not have intended. For example, Beethoven's Fifth Symphony, Tchaikovsky's 1812 Overture, and Sousa's Stars and Stripes Forever have been appropriated by Americans and are regularly played with patriotic fervor on July Fourth, Independence Day.
In recent years, the physical aspects of music, especially Rock 'n' Roll as performed by Led Zeppelin, the Beatles, or Bill Haley's Comets, have dominated popular music. Bluegrass and Country music is also in this category, evoking physical movement -- dancing and clapping -- as responses.
There are exceptions, of course. Some of the words to pop songs are lyrical, if not poetic. Others, however, are secondary to the beat and the physical response the music can evoke.
Some music forms, moreover, can overlap in the way they generate responses. The cerebral and the emotional can both be reflected in human response to music, and the physical and emotional can both show as responses. But it's questionable whether the cerebral and the physical overlap strongly. Granted, Bach wrote dance music (the stately minuet, for instance), but the physical response to Bach's music is tightly restrained by the cerebral, and is not manifest as strongly as the gyrations evident at a rock performance.
Monday, December 31, 2012
News and Gossip
What they need to know is news. What they want to know is gossip.
Journalism is the first draft of history, but reporters are not stenographers and are under no obligation to record every word.
There is a thin line between news and gossip, and the idea itself of what constitutes news is very subjective. Reporters not only tell readers and viewers what they want to know, but also what they need to know.
All news is local. People of a small town want to know and need to know what the local board of education is doing with their tax dollars. Those in a city want and need to know the crime rate and whether and how government officials are corrupt. Readers and viewers in a region have an interest in the expansion plans of corporations and whether more jobs will become available. On a national level, citizens should know the status of economic and foreign policy.
Meanwhile, some have a strong fascination with celebrities and what they are up to. This, too, is news even as it is rated gossip by those who care little about the antics of celebrities.
Reporters are guided not only by their own interests, but also by the interests of their readers and viewers. Even as they do this, however, reporters have an obligation to inform (and entertain) with anecdotes and events that the public needs to know as well as what the public wants to know.
And while there are two extremes --- news and gossip -- there can be a great deal of overlap, so that the line between the two is often thin and blurred.
Journalism is the first draft of history, but reporters are not stenographers and are under no obligation to record every word.
There is a thin line between news and gossip, and the idea itself of what constitutes news is very subjective. Reporters not only tell readers and viewers what they want to know, but also what they need to know.
All news is local. People of a small town want to know and need to know what the local board of education is doing with their tax dollars. Those in a city want and need to know the crime rate and whether and how government officials are corrupt. Readers and viewers in a region have an interest in the expansion plans of corporations and whether more jobs will become available. On a national level, citizens should know the status of economic and foreign policy.
Meanwhile, some have a strong fascination with celebrities and what they are up to. This, too, is news even as it is rated gossip by those who care little about the antics of celebrities.
Reporters are guided not only by their own interests, but also by the interests of their readers and viewers. Even as they do this, however, reporters have an obligation to inform (and entertain) with anecdotes and events that the public needs to know as well as what the public wants to know.
And while there are two extremes --- news and gossip -- there can be a great deal of overlap, so that the line between the two is often thin and blurred.
Sunday, December 30, 2012
Grammar Labels
The study of grammar gives you labels for things you already know. Generally, people learn and internalize the basic rules of their native language by the age of six. After that, it's partly a matter of learning which rules do not apply in various situations.
On entering school, however, children are given labels for elements of grammar, which they have already, at a subconscious level, learned. The reason it's confusing is because the labels are in Latin, based on Latin grammar.
But Latin is not English, and the grammars are different. Not better, as many academics and teachers used to think; just different.
For example, take the case system -- please.
There are at least six cases for nouns in Latin grammar, four of which were adopted and applied to nouns in English -- nominative, genitive, dative and accusative -- and they refer to the way nouns change their form according to their function in a sentence.
That's confusing to a native speaker of English because the case system does not exist in the English language. Words do not change their form according to their function, as they do in Latin, German, Russian and other languages.
There is, however, one small set of exceptions: pronouns. I, me, mine; he, him, his; she, her, hers; they, them, theirs, and others in the set. Otherwise, the word man, for example, remains unchanged whether a man is the subject, the object, the possessor or anything else.
On entering school, however, children are given labels for elements of grammar, which they have already, at a subconscious level, learned. The reason it's confusing is because the labels are in Latin, based on Latin grammar.
But Latin is not English, and the grammars are different. Not better, as many academics and teachers used to think; just different.
For example, take the case system -- please.
There are at least six cases for nouns in Latin grammar, four of which were adopted and applied to nouns in English -- nominative, genitive, dative and accusative -- and they refer to the way nouns change their form according to their function in a sentence.
That's confusing to a native speaker of English because the case system does not exist in the English language. Words do not change their form according to their function, as they do in Latin, German, Russian and other languages.
There is, however, one small set of exceptions: pronouns. I, me, mine; he, him, his; she, her, hers; they, them, theirs, and others in the set. Otherwise, the word man, for example, remains unchanged whether a man is the subject, the object, the possessor or anything else.
Skill Sets
A champion of any kind needs a set of skills.
A champion debater needs skills different from those of a sea captain, a general, or a musician.
Good spellers, like musicians, have a talent that can be encouraged and developed. Anyone can be taught to play piano, but there was only one Dave Brubeck. All children are taught to spell and how to put words on paper, but there was only one Ernest Hemingway, and while he was a great writer, he was notoriously poor at spelling.
Making music is one skill set; making money is another. Spelling is one skill set; writing is another.
Leading an orchestra is one skill set; leading a battalion is another.
Accept people, especially children, as they are, and do not expect everyone to have all skill sets.
A champion debater needs skills different from those of a sea captain, a general, or a musician.
Good spellers, like musicians, have a talent that can be encouraged and developed. Anyone can be taught to play piano, but there was only one Dave Brubeck. All children are taught to spell and how to put words on paper, but there was only one Ernest Hemingway, and while he was a great writer, he was notoriously poor at spelling.
Making music is one skill set; making money is another. Spelling is one skill set; writing is another.
Leading an orchestra is one skill set; leading a battalion is another.
Accept people, especially children, as they are, and do not expect everyone to have all skill sets.
Liberal Arts
To the medieval scholastics, there were seven arts that formed the basis of, or the roads to, a liberal education. These seven liberal arts were the trivium (three roads) of grammar, rhetoric and logic; and the quadrivium (four roads) of arithmetic, geometry, music and astronomy. The larger field of philosophy united them all.
It's too bad that some of these words, like trivial and rhetoric, have become negative. In their original sense, the trivium meant three introductory roads to knowledge.
Grammar dealt with how a sentence was constructed, rhetoric was the art of persuasion, and logic was how thoughts were organized for best effect.
The other four roads, the quadrivium, all were rooted in the concept of number. Arithmetic dealt with number in itself, music was number in time, geometry was number in space, and astronomy (or cosmology) dealt with number in space and time together.
Are the liberal arts still taught in American schools? Yes, but they are not called that, and are not taught well enough. "Trivial" has come to denote something unimportant.
"Rhetoric" and its partner "rhetorical" have become associated with sleazy marketing of a concept that may not be true. "Grammar" has become arduous, and "logic" has become boring. Why? In too many classes, the teaching of grammar still uses Latin-based terms, even though they have little or no relevance, and for those concepts that do, there are English equivalents. As for logic, there are only a few terms and concepts, yet an entire (and expensive) book is devoted to them.
Obfuscation is not education.
It's too bad that some of these words, like trivial and rhetoric, have become negative. In their original sense, the trivium meant three introductory roads to knowledge.
Grammar dealt with how a sentence was constructed, rhetoric was the art of persuasion, and logic was how thoughts were organized for best effect.
The other four roads, the quadrivium, all were rooted in the concept of number. Arithmetic dealt with number in itself, music was number in time, geometry was number in space, and astronomy (or cosmology) dealt with number in space and time together.
Are the liberal arts still taught in American schools? Yes, but they are not called that, and are not taught well enough. "Trivial" has come to denote something unimportant.
"Rhetoric" and its partner "rhetorical" have become associated with sleazy marketing of a concept that may not be true. "Grammar" has become arduous, and "logic" has become boring. Why? In too many classes, the teaching of grammar still uses Latin-based terms, even though they have little or no relevance, and for those concepts that do, there are English equivalents. As for logic, there are only a few terms and concepts, yet an entire (and expensive) book is devoted to them.
Obfuscation is not education.
Saturday, December 29, 2012
Thrift Hazard and Moral Paradox
Thrift can be a hazard. Who knew?
If everyone saves and no one spends, the economy stalls.
If everyone spends and no one saves, the economy booms, then crashes.
Economic textbooks teach about the Paradox of Thrift and Moral Hazard, and each can have a negative impact on a nation's economic health. But when they work together, the effects are like compound interest -- a very powerful force.
Excessive thrift can be a hazard because consumers refuse to spend, thus diverting the flow of money to savings institutions in the hope of increasing their personal wealth. But money must flow to keep an economy healthy, and as the flow is diverted or slows, so does the national economy.
By the same measure, excess spending causes too much debt, and eventually consumers realize they must pay down their debts, and consumption -- in turn the overall economy -- stalls.
Moral Hazard comes into play when company executives, in particular, know that no matter the risk, someone else will be available to bail them out if their investment fails. It can be a paradox when, under the guise of morality, they indulge in practices that can harm others regardless of whether the project is a success or a failure. All that really matters is profit.
In the end, the health of an economy depends on the flow of money, or velocity, in econospeak, as well as the quantity of it. Too much supply, and inflation results. Too little, and consumers cannot buy. As for velocity, if it moves too quickly, the public is swamped and prices rise. If too slowly, buyers must wait longer between purchases.
Some expansion of the money supply is needed to ensure growth of an economy. The problem lies in deciding how much money growth (inflation) is enough without causing excess inflation, or rising prices.
The latest euphemism from the Federal Reserve is "quantitative easing," which really means expanding the money supply in an effort to boost economic growth. Ideally, slow growth is better. Rapid growth can outpace the availability of resources (land, labor and capital), and push up prices too quickly. Very slow growth does not encourage more employment, or an increase in production to match demand.
Is a puzzlement.
If everyone saves and no one spends, the economy stalls.
If everyone spends and no one saves, the economy booms, then crashes.
Economic textbooks teach about the Paradox of Thrift and Moral Hazard, and each can have a negative impact on a nation's economic health. But when they work together, the effects are like compound interest -- a very powerful force.
Excessive thrift can be a hazard because consumers refuse to spend, thus diverting the flow of money to savings institutions in the hope of increasing their personal wealth. But money must flow to keep an economy healthy, and as the flow is diverted or slows, so does the national economy.
By the same measure, excess spending causes too much debt, and eventually consumers realize they must pay down their debts, and consumption -- in turn the overall economy -- stalls.
Moral Hazard comes into play when company executives, in particular, know that no matter the risk, someone else will be available to bail them out if their investment fails. It can be a paradox when, under the guise of morality, they indulge in practices that can harm others regardless of whether the project is a success or a failure. All that really matters is profit.
In the end, the health of an economy depends on the flow of money, or velocity, in econospeak, as well as the quantity of it. Too much supply, and inflation results. Too little, and consumers cannot buy. As for velocity, if it moves too quickly, the public is swamped and prices rise. If too slowly, buyers must wait longer between purchases.
Some expansion of the money supply is needed to ensure growth of an economy. The problem lies in deciding how much money growth (inflation) is enough without causing excess inflation, or rising prices.
The latest euphemism from the Federal Reserve is "quantitative easing," which really means expanding the money supply in an effort to boost economic growth. Ideally, slow growth is better. Rapid growth can outpace the availability of resources (land, labor and capital), and push up prices too quickly. Very slow growth does not encourage more employment, or an increase in production to match demand.
Is a puzzlement.
Thursday, December 27, 2012
Provoking Thought
Editor's Revenge is aimed at provoking thought. It matters not whether you agree. It matters only that you consider options, possibilities and alternatives.
It matters only that you think.
Question: How many politicians does it take to change a light bulb?
Answer: Unknown. A committee studies the need, another the power source, another the environmental issues, yet another the standards involved, plus subcommittees to hold hearings and summarize testimony from experts, engineers, and lamp executives to ensure compatibility, union representatives for alternate viewpoints and working conditions as well as non-union issues, and lawyers for each of the interested parties.
Eventually, the issue is tabled until the next session of Congress, or until Daylight Saving Time returns, whichever comes first, unless there is an adjournment during election season, in which case non-union maintenance staff or a part-time secretary will make the change, incurring the wrath of who knows how many other constituencies, prompting a new round of investigations and hearings, all done by candle light.
On language, remember that slang is not the past tense of sling.
It matters only that you think.
Question: How many politicians does it take to change a light bulb?
Answer: Unknown. A committee studies the need, another the power source, another the environmental issues, yet another the standards involved, plus subcommittees to hold hearings and summarize testimony from experts, engineers, and lamp executives to ensure compatibility, union representatives for alternate viewpoints and working conditions as well as non-union issues, and lawyers for each of the interested parties.
Eventually, the issue is tabled until the next session of Congress, or until Daylight Saving Time returns, whichever comes first, unless there is an adjournment during election season, in which case non-union maintenance staff or a part-time secretary will make the change, incurring the wrath of who knows how many other constituencies, prompting a new round of investigations and hearings, all done by candle light.
On language, remember that slang is not the past tense of sling.
Wednesday, December 26, 2012
Chronic Dysfunction
Dysfunction can take many forms. We all suffer times when it strikes, but for most of us, the malady is temporary.
In Congress, however, the malady has become chronic, if not acute. For health care professionals, the difference is this: chronic means the problem is there all the time, and acute means systems could begin to shut down and the malady may become life-threatening.
When chronic dysfunction in Congress becomes acute, the government faces a fiscal shutdown. The issue then becomes whether and how a federal government shutdown affects state and local governments, industry and the general public.
Clearly, the shutdown of any major employer -- business or government -- rattles through a regional or national economy, causing lost jobs, lost wages, reduced spending, less tax revenue, a cutback in government's ability to supply services and a need to further reduce its payroll, causing more lost jobs, and the cycle accelerates.
Further, as federal aid to state and local authorities goes down, these entities also look to higher taxes and fewer expenses to close their budget gaps, since they cannot operate at a deficit, and the snowball becomes an avalanche.
You can't stop an avalanche, but you can act to prevent one.
Note to hardline fundamentalists: Stop throwing snowballs.
In Congress, however, the malady has become chronic, if not acute. For health care professionals, the difference is this: chronic means the problem is there all the time, and acute means systems could begin to shut down and the malady may become life-threatening.
When chronic dysfunction in Congress becomes acute, the government faces a fiscal shutdown. The issue then becomes whether and how a federal government shutdown affects state and local governments, industry and the general public.
Clearly, the shutdown of any major employer -- business or government -- rattles through a regional or national economy, causing lost jobs, lost wages, reduced spending, less tax revenue, a cutback in government's ability to supply services and a need to further reduce its payroll, causing more lost jobs, and the cycle accelerates.
Further, as federal aid to state and local authorities goes down, these entities also look to higher taxes and fewer expenses to close their budget gaps, since they cannot operate at a deficit, and the snowball becomes an avalanche.
You can't stop an avalanche, but you can act to prevent one.
Note to hardline fundamentalists: Stop throwing snowballs.
Open Doors
"Live long and prosper." -- Spock
"Now is the winter of our discontent." -- Shakespeare
"Go west, young man." -- Horace Greeley
Newcomers are still welcome to America -- if they have needed skills, are well educated and/or plan to invest $1 million in a new company that will employ ten people. The federal government has a program called Entrepreneur Pathways, designed to help these folks get an entry visa.
There are five "preference categories" listed by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) available to those who want to become permanent residents, These are the areas with the lowest unemployment rate, and therefore the greatest need for new workers. And if these jobs can't be filled by U.S. citizen-residents, the door is open to newcomers. (Here's a link to that government web site:
http://wh.gov/5COq#.UNN99jaf1Us.email )
These are the categories:
-- Extraordinary abilities
-- Professionals
-- Skilled workers
-- "Special immigrants," including foreign service employees and religious workers
-- Investors who will put $1 million into a new firm with ten full-time workers.
Consider: Immigration may be a leading indicator of economic progress -- up or down. So there may be a correlation between migration and jobs, and in turn the economy of a nation. Migrants follow the jobs, just as farm workers follow the ripening crops ready for harvest.
Even those opposed to substantial immigration of low-skill, low-education workers are aware of the employment difference. The Center for Immigration Studies (www.cis.org) cites government data showing an unemployment rate of just 4.6 percent for college graduates in the third quarter of 2012, compared to 23.4 percent for those who have not finished high school.
So there is also, it seems, a correlation between education and employment. How is it, then, that so many recent graduates complain they can't find a job?
Employers have maintained for several months that skilled manufacturing jobs are available in America, but many applicants don't have the skills needed, and that's why manufacturing is going overseas.
Some jobs, however, can't go overseas, and that includes fields like oil and gas exploration in Montana. The New York Times reports that some young workers are deferring college for an oilfield job paying as much as $50,000 yearly. The job may not last, they admit, but they figure on making money while the oil flows.
The unemployment rate throughout Montana was 5.8 percent in November, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, compared to 7.7 percent nationally. Highest rates were in Nevada (10.8 percent) and Rhode Island (10.4 percent). The lowest jobless rates were in North Dakota (3.1 percent), Nebraska (3.7 percent), and South Dakota (4.4 percent).
Consider: Is college right for everyone in today's employment market? Is a trade school a better option than liberal arts? Time was, the big money to be made had been in the financial sector. Emphasis on "had been." For the time being, Gordon Gekko and his fellow masters of the universe are not even "has beens."
"Now is the winter of our discontent." -- Shakespeare
"Go west, young man." -- Horace Greeley
Newcomers are still welcome to America -- if they have needed skills, are well educated and/or plan to invest $1 million in a new company that will employ ten people. The federal government has a program called Entrepreneur Pathways, designed to help these folks get an entry visa.
There are five "preference categories" listed by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) available to those who want to become permanent residents, These are the areas with the lowest unemployment rate, and therefore the greatest need for new workers. And if these jobs can't be filled by U.S. citizen-residents, the door is open to newcomers. (Here's a link to that government web site:
http://wh.gov/5COq#.UNN99jaf1Us.email )
These are the categories:
-- Extraordinary abilities
-- Professionals
-- Skilled workers
-- "Special immigrants," including foreign service employees and religious workers
-- Investors who will put $1 million into a new firm with ten full-time workers.
Consider: Immigration may be a leading indicator of economic progress -- up or down. So there may be a correlation between migration and jobs, and in turn the economy of a nation. Migrants follow the jobs, just as farm workers follow the ripening crops ready for harvest.
Even those opposed to substantial immigration of low-skill, low-education workers are aware of the employment difference. The Center for Immigration Studies (www.cis.org) cites government data showing an unemployment rate of just 4.6 percent for college graduates in the third quarter of 2012, compared to 23.4 percent for those who have not finished high school.
So there is also, it seems, a correlation between education and employment. How is it, then, that so many recent graduates complain they can't find a job?
Employers have maintained for several months that skilled manufacturing jobs are available in America, but many applicants don't have the skills needed, and that's why manufacturing is going overseas.
Some jobs, however, can't go overseas, and that includes fields like oil and gas exploration in Montana. The New York Times reports that some young workers are deferring college for an oilfield job paying as much as $50,000 yearly. The job may not last, they admit, but they figure on making money while the oil flows.
The unemployment rate throughout Montana was 5.8 percent in November, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, compared to 7.7 percent nationally. Highest rates were in Nevada (10.8 percent) and Rhode Island (10.4 percent). The lowest jobless rates were in North Dakota (3.1 percent), Nebraska (3.7 percent), and South Dakota (4.4 percent).
Consider: Is college right for everyone in today's employment market? Is a trade school a better option than liberal arts? Time was, the big money to be made had been in the financial sector. Emphasis on "had been." For the time being, Gordon Gekko and his fellow masters of the universe are not even "has beens."
Speech Control
Gun lobbyists began a petition drive on the White House after CNN commentator Piers Morgan came out in favor of more restrictions on gun sales. Petitioners demand that the government act immediately to deport Morgan (he's British) for his alleged violations of the Second Amendment to the Constitution.
They conveniently forget the First Amendment.
It seems there is a law that stipulates the President must respond to any petition that accumulates 25,000 signatures. Within days of its initial posting, the petition had more than 30,000 signatures, and is nearing 50,000.
Morgan seems to be taking the fuss in stride, even to the point of urging friends to join and sign the petition.
Meanwhile, he says he will continue to use his program as a debate forum on gun issues, as well as to express his own views.
They conveniently forget the First Amendment.
It seems there is a law that stipulates the President must respond to any petition that accumulates 25,000 signatures. Within days of its initial posting, the petition had more than 30,000 signatures, and is nearing 50,000.
Morgan seems to be taking the fuss in stride, even to the point of urging friends to join and sign the petition.
Meanwhile, he says he will continue to use his program as a debate forum on gun issues, as well as to express his own views.
Sunday, December 23, 2012
No Surrender
"Good grief!" -- Charlie Brown
What Obama proposes, the GOP opposes
Four years ago, the stated policy of the Republican Party was to ensure a single term for President Barack Obama. It didn't work.
Today, the strategy of the Grand Olde Party is to provoke his failure. And the way to do that, they seem to believe, is through a "do nothing" policy.
Demand everything.
Suggest nothing.
Oppose all offers.
Offer no deals.
Reject any compromise.
Wait for the President to fold.
Consider this:
B is for Boehner.
B is for Plan B.
B is for booted by radicals.
B is for bluff.
Call it. The Republican Luddites are about to destroy the very machinery they have sworn to serve and protect -- Congress and the American government.
"My way or the highway!" they shout.
How's this for a response: There's the door.
For many years, Ulster Loyalists could stand by their oath of "No surrender!" based on their ability to keep and hold whatever jobs were available, shutting out opponents. But when the Ulster economy went south and the independent republic offered prosperity, the Loyalist stranglehold gave way to the Celtic Tiger's clutches.
However, the Tiger later sickened and ran off, bloated by its own hyperactivity. Eventually, it may return, lean and hungry once again. Perhaps. One day.
Meanwhile, in Washington, conservatives cling to classical economics, sticking to the True Faith that one day, the business cycle will turn up again and renew itself.
The concept of renewal is also true of the Mayan calendar, except that the cycle lasts 5,125 years. We should live so long.
What Obama proposes, the GOP opposes
Four years ago, the stated policy of the Republican Party was to ensure a single term for President Barack Obama. It didn't work.
Today, the strategy of the Grand Olde Party is to provoke his failure. And the way to do that, they seem to believe, is through a "do nothing" policy.
Demand everything.
Suggest nothing.
Oppose all offers.
Offer no deals.
Reject any compromise.
Wait for the President to fold.
Consider this:
B is for Boehner.
B is for Plan B.
B is for booted by radicals.
B is for bluff.
Call it. The Republican Luddites are about to destroy the very machinery they have sworn to serve and protect -- Congress and the American government.
"My way or the highway!" they shout.
How's this for a response: There's the door.
For many years, Ulster Loyalists could stand by their oath of "No surrender!" based on their ability to keep and hold whatever jobs were available, shutting out opponents. But when the Ulster economy went south and the independent republic offered prosperity, the Loyalist stranglehold gave way to the Celtic Tiger's clutches.
However, the Tiger later sickened and ran off, bloated by its own hyperactivity. Eventually, it may return, lean and hungry once again. Perhaps. One day.
Meanwhile, in Washington, conservatives cling to classical economics, sticking to the True Faith that one day, the business cycle will turn up again and renew itself.
The concept of renewal is also true of the Mayan calendar, except that the cycle lasts 5,125 years. We should live so long.
Friday, December 21, 2012
Cliff Dwellers
How dangerous, really, is the so-called "fiscal cliff?" Better question: What does it mean? What does it portend when taxes and expenses interact in such a way as to endanger the survival of a nation and its government? Are we in such imminent danger?
All that, indeed, is what the rhetoric implies. Taxes will go up. Or is it down? Expenses will go down. Or is it up? But if taxes go up, government will have more revenue, therefore less need to cut services. If expenses go down, there will be less worry about revenue.
At root, with two elements -- taxes and expenses -- there are four possibilities:
1/ Taxes and expenses will both go up.
2/ Taxes and expenses will both go down.
3/ Taxes will go up and expenses will go down.
4/ Taxes will go down and expenses will go up.
Consider each. (Granted, this is a highly simplified scenario.)
1/ No problem. One pays for the other.
2/ No problem. One balances the other.
3/ No problem. One outweighs the other.
4/ Problem. Less revenue means government can't afford the same level of services, and goes into debt.
But the government is already in debt, and has been for years. Moreover, Economics 101 teaches that government should go into debt to buy the nation out of recession.
So. No problem.
What, then, is the real issue being fought over in Washington? Answer: Power and control.
American history, as taught in 7th Grade classes for decades, emphasizes the tradition of compromise in establishing, forming, and continuing the business of government.
There has been little sign of that in Washington recently.
If reporters and writers are not cynics before they enter journalism, they soon become so.
All that, indeed, is what the rhetoric implies. Taxes will go up. Or is it down? Expenses will go down. Or is it up? But if taxes go up, government will have more revenue, therefore less need to cut services. If expenses go down, there will be less worry about revenue.
At root, with two elements -- taxes and expenses -- there are four possibilities:
1/ Taxes and expenses will both go up.
2/ Taxes and expenses will both go down.
3/ Taxes will go up and expenses will go down.
4/ Taxes will go down and expenses will go up.
Consider each. (Granted, this is a highly simplified scenario.)
1/ No problem. One pays for the other.
2/ No problem. One balances the other.
3/ No problem. One outweighs the other.
4/ Problem. Less revenue means government can't afford the same level of services, and goes into debt.
But the government is already in debt, and has been for years. Moreover, Economics 101 teaches that government should go into debt to buy the nation out of recession.
So. No problem.
What, then, is the real issue being fought over in Washington? Answer: Power and control.
American history, as taught in 7th Grade classes for decades, emphasizes the tradition of compromise in establishing, forming, and continuing the business of government.
There has been little sign of that in Washington recently.
If reporters and writers are not cynics before they enter journalism, they soon become so.
Xenophobia
Why did you come to America, Dad?
There was no work.
Fear and distrust of strangers has long been part of the human condition. But when it leads to bigotry, bias and discrimination in hiring, this fear quickly hurts a business and, eventually, the larger economy of a region, state or nation.
Some may accept this as a cost of doing business, and willingly hire less competent, and more expensive, workers of their own kind. Other managers, more attuned to profit and loss statements and perhaps less likely to prejudge new, available workers, will ignore personal differences and look instead to skill levels. In turn, this brings better efficiency, productivity and profit.
Newcomers have long had to overcome such barriers as language, culture and color differences. Many willingly take on the struggle because conditions at home were worse. These "worse" conditions could be economic, healthy, military, religious, educational or many other reasons, including the private and personal.
Whatever the reasons, however, they and their children become Americans.
Meanwhile, those who favor stricter quotas under the mantra of "immigration reform" claim that most newcomers have "no more than a high school education." (Center for Immigration Studies, Washington DC, December 2012) And, according to their report, "the employment picture is bleak for less-educated native-born American, who are most likely to compete with illegal immigrants for jobs."
Moreover, nearly 28 million working-age Americans without jobs "have no education beyond high school."
"This is a huge pool of potential less-skilled workers," the Center's report said.
So, contrary to the argument that newcomers fill a need that is not being met by citizens, "it would be a mistake to think that every job taken by an illegal immigrant is a job lost by a native," according to the report, written by Steven A. Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies.
There is already a large pool of potential workers available in America, Camarota writes. Therefore, sending the illegals home would have little effect, since "there would seem to be an ample supply of idle workers to replace them, particularly workers with little education," he adds.
"Of course, employers might have to pay more, and offer better benefits and working conditions in order to attract American citizens," especially the least-educated and poorer," and this, Camarota notes, is "a desirable social outcome."
He may be right. If sending illegal newcomers home creates a labor shortage and results in improved living standards and bargaining power for natives, this would be a good thing for those currently enjoying citizenship. Creating a labor shortage, however, is not a good thing for employers, and in the long run encourages more immigration. Meanwhile, here's another question: What's the real reason for keeping out the newcomers?
America is not a melting pot; it is a tapestry, a kaleidoscope of many shapes, colors and personalities. By putting strict limits on newcomers, America loses its diversity.
There was no work.
Fear and distrust of strangers has long been part of the human condition. But when it leads to bigotry, bias and discrimination in hiring, this fear quickly hurts a business and, eventually, the larger economy of a region, state or nation.
Some may accept this as a cost of doing business, and willingly hire less competent, and more expensive, workers of their own kind. Other managers, more attuned to profit and loss statements and perhaps less likely to prejudge new, available workers, will ignore personal differences and look instead to skill levels. In turn, this brings better efficiency, productivity and profit.
Newcomers have long had to overcome such barriers as language, culture and color differences. Many willingly take on the struggle because conditions at home were worse. These "worse" conditions could be economic, healthy, military, religious, educational or many other reasons, including the private and personal.
Whatever the reasons, however, they and their children become Americans.
Meanwhile, those who favor stricter quotas under the mantra of "immigration reform" claim that most newcomers have "no more than a high school education." (Center for Immigration Studies, Washington DC, December 2012) And, according to their report, "the employment picture is bleak for less-educated native-born American, who are most likely to compete with illegal immigrants for jobs."
Moreover, nearly 28 million working-age Americans without jobs "have no education beyond high school."
"This is a huge pool of potential less-skilled workers," the Center's report said.
So, contrary to the argument that newcomers fill a need that is not being met by citizens, "it would be a mistake to think that every job taken by an illegal immigrant is a job lost by a native," according to the report, written by Steven A. Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies.
There is already a large pool of potential workers available in America, Camarota writes. Therefore, sending the illegals home would have little effect, since "there would seem to be an ample supply of idle workers to replace them, particularly workers with little education," he adds.
"Of course, employers might have to pay more, and offer better benefits and working conditions in order to attract American citizens," especially the least-educated and poorer," and this, Camarota notes, is "a desirable social outcome."
He may be right. If sending illegal newcomers home creates a labor shortage and results in improved living standards and bargaining power for natives, this would be a good thing for those currently enjoying citizenship. Creating a labor shortage, however, is not a good thing for employers, and in the long run encourages more immigration. Meanwhile, here's another question: What's the real reason for keeping out the newcomers?
America is not a melting pot; it is a tapestry, a kaleidoscope of many shapes, colors and personalities. By putting strict limits on newcomers, America loses its diversity.
Wednesday, December 19, 2012
Housing and Jobs
The market for homes depends heavily on the jobs market.
Which comes first, supply or demand?
If you build it, they will come.
If you make it, they will buy.
"We not only make stuff you want, we make stuff you didn't even know you wanted." -- Larry the Cable Guy
Marketing moves product.
Without money, the best-laid marketing plans are useless.
Look for a rebound in the housing market, but only as the job market improves, providing more people with enough income for a down payment and the ability to make mortgage payments, as well as the confidence that they will remain employed and comfortable in their income level. However, if a family supporter has no job or earns little, the family will rent or stay with relatives. Even for many with jobs, and for low-income families, the major hurdle for owning a home is the down payment.
In years past, lenders wanted as much as a 30 percent down payment for a conventional mortgage. Over time, that changed, aided by government programs such as VA loans, which could be had with zero down payment; or FHA loans, which call for a minimal down payment. Eventually, lenders innovated their requirements so people in general could get into a starter home with low or no down payment, anticipating that the value of the house would rise, enabling them to sell the starter home and use that increase as a down payment on a bigger, more expensive house.
In that market, things were always looking up.
But eventually, things stopped looking up, and the entire system crumbled along with the economy.
Today, mortgage rates are historically low, so the supply of money for home mortgage loans is not a problem. Meanwhile, however, the demand for housing is not yet strong enough to drive up interest rates.
The Law of Supply and Demand has not yet been repealed. The available supply of new and existing homes may be steady, and the availability of funds for mortgage loans may be rising, but the demand for homes and mortgages has not yet responded to the supply.
There are signs, however, that spring will bring a bloom. The government has reported that building permits reached a four and half year high in November. Construction starts, however, dipped after three months of gains.
But loan applications are off, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association, dropping 12.3 percent in the week ended Dec. 14. The interest rate for a 30-year mortgage remained at about 3.5 percent. And the National Association of Home Building said members showed more confidence in this month's survey than they have in more than six years.
The nationwide unemployment rate, while showing a steady decline from a year ago, was 7.7 percent in November, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. There's a wide range among states, however, with North Dakota showing the lowest, at 3.1 percent, and Nevada the highest, at 11.5 percent in October, the latest month available for state data.
It's important to remember, however, that as with many other aspects of a national economy, housing and job markets are local, and the interplay of the two reflects that. So while national trends may be encouraging to politicians and to industry leaders, the people may remain suspicious.
Nonetheless, if the economy continues to improve and jobs become more available, look for the housing market to respond to an increased demand.
Which comes first, supply or demand?
If you build it, they will come.
If you make it, they will buy.
"We not only make stuff you want, we make stuff you didn't even know you wanted." -- Larry the Cable Guy
Marketing moves product.
Without money, the best-laid marketing plans are useless.
Look for a rebound in the housing market, but only as the job market improves, providing more people with enough income for a down payment and the ability to make mortgage payments, as well as the confidence that they will remain employed and comfortable in their income level. However, if a family supporter has no job or earns little, the family will rent or stay with relatives. Even for many with jobs, and for low-income families, the major hurdle for owning a home is the down payment.
In years past, lenders wanted as much as a 30 percent down payment for a conventional mortgage. Over time, that changed, aided by government programs such as VA loans, which could be had with zero down payment; or FHA loans, which call for a minimal down payment. Eventually, lenders innovated their requirements so people in general could get into a starter home with low or no down payment, anticipating that the value of the house would rise, enabling them to sell the starter home and use that increase as a down payment on a bigger, more expensive house.
In that market, things were always looking up.
But eventually, things stopped looking up, and the entire system crumbled along with the economy.
Today, mortgage rates are historically low, so the supply of money for home mortgage loans is not a problem. Meanwhile, however, the demand for housing is not yet strong enough to drive up interest rates.
The Law of Supply and Demand has not yet been repealed. The available supply of new and existing homes may be steady, and the availability of funds for mortgage loans may be rising, but the demand for homes and mortgages has not yet responded to the supply.
There are signs, however, that spring will bring a bloom. The government has reported that building permits reached a four and half year high in November. Construction starts, however, dipped after three months of gains.
But loan applications are off, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association, dropping 12.3 percent in the week ended Dec. 14. The interest rate for a 30-year mortgage remained at about 3.5 percent. And the National Association of Home Building said members showed more confidence in this month's survey than they have in more than six years.
The nationwide unemployment rate, while showing a steady decline from a year ago, was 7.7 percent in November, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. There's a wide range among states, however, with North Dakota showing the lowest, at 3.1 percent, and Nevada the highest, at 11.5 percent in October, the latest month available for state data.
It's important to remember, however, that as with many other aspects of a national economy, housing and job markets are local, and the interplay of the two reflects that. So while national trends may be encouraging to politicians and to industry leaders, the people may remain suspicious.
Nonetheless, if the economy continues to improve and jobs become more available, look for the housing market to respond to an increased demand.
Sunday, December 16, 2012
Rights and Respnsibilities
Gun rights advocates ignore or forget the opening phrase of the Second Amendment: "A well-regulated militia ..."
Every right carries responsibilities, obligations and consequences.
They have the right to speak out.
We have the right to ignore them.
Neither has the right to suppress.
Government has the obligation to maintain peace, and separate demonstrators from opponents. Demonstrators have the obligation to accept consequences.
The Westboro Baptist Church of Oklahoma has claimed the right of free speech and intends to send demonstrators to funerals in Newtown, CT, as they have sent demonstrators to military funerals.
Police have kept church member/demonstrators as much as half a mile from funeral sites, to prevent confrontations.
In the past, motorcycle patriots have assembled to oppose the demonstrators and help protect mourners from activist slanders. And government has acted on its right and obligation to protect the rights of one side and the peace of others.
The general public, meanwhile, has the right to attend funerals, support mourners and ignore demonstrators.
Some activist small groups are skillful in manipulating media to get exposure for their radical views far out of proportion to their numbers or the rationality of their sentiments. But is ignoring them the appropriate response? That depends on whether and how much their rightful activities interfere with mine. If they are around the block or half a mile away, I can ignore them. If they insist on waving hateful signs and slogans in my face, I cannot ignore them, but I can expect government to intervene. You cannot yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Nor can you cite "God's judgment" at a funeral for slaughtered children.
Meanwhile, the mass media have a decision. Do they ignore the radical fringe groups, small though they be, in the hope they will go away? Or do they expose them for what they are, even if that means giving them airtime and print space?
Every right carries responsibilities, obligations and consequences.
They have the right to speak out.
We have the right to ignore them.
Neither has the right to suppress.
Government has the obligation to maintain peace, and separate demonstrators from opponents. Demonstrators have the obligation to accept consequences.
The Westboro Baptist Church of Oklahoma has claimed the right of free speech and intends to send demonstrators to funerals in Newtown, CT, as they have sent demonstrators to military funerals.
Police have kept church member/demonstrators as much as half a mile from funeral sites, to prevent confrontations.
In the past, motorcycle patriots have assembled to oppose the demonstrators and help protect mourners from activist slanders. And government has acted on its right and obligation to protect the rights of one side and the peace of others.
The general public, meanwhile, has the right to attend funerals, support mourners and ignore demonstrators.
Some activist small groups are skillful in manipulating media to get exposure for their radical views far out of proportion to their numbers or the rationality of their sentiments. But is ignoring them the appropriate response? That depends on whether and how much their rightful activities interfere with mine. If they are around the block or half a mile away, I can ignore them. If they insist on waving hateful signs and slogans in my face, I cannot ignore them, but I can expect government to intervene. You cannot yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Nor can you cite "God's judgment" at a funeral for slaughtered children.
Meanwhile, the mass media have a decision. Do they ignore the radical fringe groups, small though they be, in the hope they will go away? Or do they expose them for what they are, even if that means giving them airtime and print space?
Saturday, December 15, 2012
Snark Attack
Conformist: How dare you disagree? What gives you the right to talk like that?
Independent: To start with, the First Amendment to the U.S.Constitution. More to the point, it doesn't give me that right, but guarantees a right I already have.
Believing takes over thinking.
There is more danger to individual rights and freedom from the radical right than from the loopy left.
Demagogues and ideologues insist on conformity to their views and ban dissent.
Some examples are Germany under Hitler and Nazism, Italy under Mussolini and Fascism, Spain under Franco and his dictatorship, Argentina under Peron and his military.
"It can't happen here," you say? To the contrary, it can, and very nearly did -- at least twice. In the 1930s, when a cabal of rightwing corporatists plotted to seize the White House and oust FDR; and again in the 1950s, under the influence of Sen. Joseph McCarthy and the widespread -- sometimes irrational -- fear of Communists behind every tree.
Schoolchildren were being taught to beware of Communists. The "Commie Menace" was an article of faith, not to be questioned. Anyone who disagreed with the Establishment Truth was labeled a Commie and shunned.
At the same time, Richard M. Nixon was an active member of the House Un-American Activities Committee, blackballing everyone from musicians and screenwriters to community activists and politicians. Later, there was President Nixon's "enemies list" and the Watergate conspiracy. And all along, there was J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI, tracking and stalking anyone who dared to question the way things were or his idea of the way things should be.
"It Can't Happen Here," you say? Read the 1935 book of the same name, by Sinclair Lewis. Or "The Plot to Seize the White House," a factual account of the 1933 plutocrat conspiracy, written by Jules Archer and published in 1973. Or "The Plots Against the President," by Sally Denton and published in January 2012.
And remember that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
Independent: To start with, the First Amendment to the U.S.Constitution. More to the point, it doesn't give me that right, but guarantees a right I already have.
Believing takes over thinking.
There is more danger to individual rights and freedom from the radical right than from the loopy left.
Demagogues and ideologues insist on conformity to their views and ban dissent.
Some examples are Germany under Hitler and Nazism, Italy under Mussolini and Fascism, Spain under Franco and his dictatorship, Argentina under Peron and his military.
"It can't happen here," you say? To the contrary, it can, and very nearly did -- at least twice. In the 1930s, when a cabal of rightwing corporatists plotted to seize the White House and oust FDR; and again in the 1950s, under the influence of Sen. Joseph McCarthy and the widespread -- sometimes irrational -- fear of Communists behind every tree.
Schoolchildren were being taught to beware of Communists. The "Commie Menace" was an article of faith, not to be questioned. Anyone who disagreed with the Establishment Truth was labeled a Commie and shunned.
At the same time, Richard M. Nixon was an active member of the House Un-American Activities Committee, blackballing everyone from musicians and screenwriters to community activists and politicians. Later, there was President Nixon's "enemies list" and the Watergate conspiracy. And all along, there was J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI, tracking and stalking anyone who dared to question the way things were or his idea of the way things should be.
"It Can't Happen Here," you say? Read the 1935 book of the same name, by Sinclair Lewis. Or "The Plot to Seize the White House," a factual account of the 1933 plutocrat conspiracy, written by Jules Archer and published in 1973. Or "The Plots Against the President," by Sally Denton and published in January 2012.
And remember that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
Thursday, December 13, 2012
Rainy Daze
Saving for an economic rainy day brings on and lengthens that rainy day.
News item: Fed keeps interest rates low; cites jobless data
Improving the employment data is a noble goal, and tries to influence the business cycle.
Low interest rates discourage saving, even as they are meant to promote borrowing to invest in equipment, expanding production capacity as firms anticipate recovery. Low rates can also encourage spending, since it's not worthwhile to hold onto cash while inflation eats up its value.
This tactic, however, is based on an assumption that in the business cycle, an economic upturn will be soon, and the cycle will respond to fiscal intervention.
But that assumption may not be valid. It's hard to know how long or how deep the trough will be.
Meanwhile, wary firms and consumers conserve funds and try to pay off previous debt as they wait for the upturn. It's like waiting for the other guy to move first.
Consequently, no one moves.
News item: Fed keeps interest rates low; cites jobless data
Improving the employment data is a noble goal, and tries to influence the business cycle.
Low interest rates discourage saving, even as they are meant to promote borrowing to invest in equipment, expanding production capacity as firms anticipate recovery. Low rates can also encourage spending, since it's not worthwhile to hold onto cash while inflation eats up its value.
This tactic, however, is based on an assumption that in the business cycle, an economic upturn will be soon, and the cycle will respond to fiscal intervention.
But that assumption may not be valid. It's hard to know how long or how deep the trough will be.
Meanwhile, wary firms and consumers conserve funds and try to pay off previous debt as they wait for the upturn. It's like waiting for the other guy to move first.
Consequently, no one moves.
Thought Lemmings
Glibness is no substitute for thought.
Thinking is hard. It's far easier to let someone else do your knowing for you. (Thank you, Sandra.)
Some seize this opportunity and eagerly spout their demagoguery to those willing to listen and unwilling to think for themselves. The sadness is that many of the demagogues believe what they preach, when a moment's thought to consider alternatives would call for moderation.
Meanwhile, they send their followers, lemming-like, rushing to the judgement of others and to their own thought-death.
PONDERINGS:
There are few so dangerous as true believers.
Too often, insult defeats persuasion.
He must be brilliant. I didn't understand anything he said.
Thinking is hard. It's far easier to let someone else do your knowing for you. (Thank you, Sandra.)
Some seize this opportunity and eagerly spout their demagoguery to those willing to listen and unwilling to think for themselves. The sadness is that many of the demagogues believe what they preach, when a moment's thought to consider alternatives would call for moderation.
Meanwhile, they send their followers, lemming-like, rushing to the judgement of others and to their own thought-death.
PONDERINGS:
There are few so dangerous as true believers.
Too often, insult defeats persuasion.
He must be brilliant. I didn't understand anything he said.
Wednesday, December 12, 2012
Moral Hazard
"Greed is good." -- Gordon Gekko
"Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
-- George Santayana
"Here's another nice mess you've gotten me into." -- Oliver Hardy
"When will they ever learn?" -- Pete Seeger
Finance mavens were once (in their dreams) masters of the universe as they invented, innovated, devised, designed, complexicated and sold to the unwary, unknowing and all too willing, their increasingly risky "products." The concept of helping a client invest gave way to a goal of selling a product to a customer. Profit from fees drove out the idea of protecting the investor.
Result: Financial institutions became too big to fail, and were bailed out by government. And now, too big to fail has yielded to too big to indict, as prosecutors choose not to charge HSBC because doing so might topple the international finance system. Instead, they "settled" the case of fraud and money laundering for $1,92 billion. Criminal charges will be held in abeyance for five years, while the international bank cleans up its act and behaves itself, according to news reports.
This takes away another incentive to keep bankers honest. With no fear of jail, there is only the "punishment" of a money "settlement." And the wrongdoers remain free to seek other ways to manipulate the system, knowing that if they lose, government will bail them out and not prosecute.
That's called "moral hazard." When there is little or no risk of punishment and there is a good possibility that they will be lifted out of holes they dig themselves into, even as they retain past profits, morality is ignored and hazard -- for the perpetrators -- is eliminated.
It seems the self-appointed masters of the universe are still in business. They transferred their expertise in manipulation from selling "product" to the unwary to laundering money for others, secure in the knowledge that they can buy their way out of punishment.
It sounds very like the Medieval practice of buying forgiveness for sins without confessing that you have actually committed them or done anything wrong. Some even purchased absolution for sins before sinning. Some insurance business.
Moral hazard can be a contagion, spreading from financial institutions to nations. If the trend continues, look for bigger buyouts and fiscal rescues. Only it won't be just smaller nations like Iceland, Greece or Ireland. Rescue plans could be put in place for larger nations, such as Spain and Italy.
The contagion -- and the bill for curing it -- may even spread westward across the Atlantic. No one is immune to the virus.
"Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
-- George Santayana
"Here's another nice mess you've gotten me into." -- Oliver Hardy
"When will they ever learn?" -- Pete Seeger
Finance mavens were once (in their dreams) masters of the universe as they invented, innovated, devised, designed, complexicated and sold to the unwary, unknowing and all too willing, their increasingly risky "products." The concept of helping a client invest gave way to a goal of selling a product to a customer. Profit from fees drove out the idea of protecting the investor.
Result: Financial institutions became too big to fail, and were bailed out by government. And now, too big to fail has yielded to too big to indict, as prosecutors choose not to charge HSBC because doing so might topple the international finance system. Instead, they "settled" the case of fraud and money laundering for $1,92 billion. Criminal charges will be held in abeyance for five years, while the international bank cleans up its act and behaves itself, according to news reports.
This takes away another incentive to keep bankers honest. With no fear of jail, there is only the "punishment" of a money "settlement." And the wrongdoers remain free to seek other ways to manipulate the system, knowing that if they lose, government will bail them out and not prosecute.
That's called "moral hazard." When there is little or no risk of punishment and there is a good possibility that they will be lifted out of holes they dig themselves into, even as they retain past profits, morality is ignored and hazard -- for the perpetrators -- is eliminated.
It seems the self-appointed masters of the universe are still in business. They transferred their expertise in manipulation from selling "product" to the unwary to laundering money for others, secure in the knowledge that they can buy their way out of punishment.
It sounds very like the Medieval practice of buying forgiveness for sins without confessing that you have actually committed them or done anything wrong. Some even purchased absolution for sins before sinning. Some insurance business.
Moral hazard can be a contagion, spreading from financial institutions to nations. If the trend continues, look for bigger buyouts and fiscal rescues. Only it won't be just smaller nations like Iceland, Greece or Ireland. Rescue plans could be put in place for larger nations, such as Spain and Italy.
The contagion -- and the bill for curing it -- may even spread westward across the Atlantic. No one is immune to the virus.
The Great Recession has been following a pattern set 80 years ago by the Great Depression. Moreover, this may be the opening act to The Great Tragedy.
Monday, December 10, 2012
The Anti-multiplier
Be careful what you wish for. You may get it.
Budget mavens are calling for an end to the mortgage interest deduction on tax returns as a way to help rescue federal finances. That's a political non-starter because it's too popular. But there's a far more important reason. Banning it would be an economic disaster, and here's why:
Toppling the mortgage interest deduction would, domino-like, also topple many other pieces of the national economy.
Consider. Without it, families would no longer be able to buy homes, since they rely so much on the tax break. As home sales drop, sales agents and brokers lose commissions. Renovators lose contracts. Movers lose shipments. As families decide to stay where they are, new home construction declines. As construction declines, lumber mills, plumbers, electricians and construction workers of all trades lose wages. As wages fall, retail sales decline. As retail sales dip, merchants lay off more workers. As sales in many fields drop, advertising also falls.
The multiplier effect works both ways.
Budget mavens are calling for an end to the mortgage interest deduction on tax returns as a way to help rescue federal finances. That's a political non-starter because it's too popular. But there's a far more important reason. Banning it would be an economic disaster, and here's why:
Toppling the mortgage interest deduction would, domino-like, also topple many other pieces of the national economy.
Consider. Without it, families would no longer be able to buy homes, since they rely so much on the tax break. As home sales drop, sales agents and brokers lose commissions. Renovators lose contracts. Movers lose shipments. As families decide to stay where they are, new home construction declines. As construction declines, lumber mills, plumbers, electricians and construction workers of all trades lose wages. As wages fall, retail sales decline. As retail sales dip, merchants lay off more workers. As sales in many fields drop, advertising also falls.
The multiplier effect works both ways.
Sunday, December 9, 2012
Austerity Tide
"The age of austerity will not be fleeting." -- Dan O'Brien, The Irish Times
"Uncertainty fuels doubt." -- Christine Lagarde, managing director, International Monetary Fund
"The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt
"No man is an island, entire of itself." -- John Donne
America is not a closed economy.
Austerity wrings funds from those who can afford it least.
News items: Ireland faces at least two more years of austerity. The UK economic tide may be out for five years. Governments in Greece and Spain are facing bankruptcy.
Germany is prosperous, but reluctant to bail out others in the EU, and many in Europe don't trust them anyway.
The United States accounts for about 20 percent of the total world output, so any substantial dip in America will affect other nations, and an austerity program will send an economic tsunami to other shores. Moreover, reductions elsewhere also affect us.
Sound frightening? It should, because it has happened before, 80 years ago. In a vain effort to protect American business, the Smoot-Hawley tariffs effectively stopped foreign-made products from entering the U.S. But it also triggered retaliation by others, building tariff walls around the world. Result: International trade hit those walls and business stopped. This protectionism, coupled with demands for a balanced federal budget, only worsened an already serious problem.
Today, demands for austerity may lead to a balanced federal budget, but at what cost? We define austerity as tax hikes and spending cuts to reach budget goals. Thus, the public will have less money as they pay more in taxes, and employees will have less income as the government reduces spending.
The goal may be laudable, but the method is harsh.
In short, the time to seek a balanced budget is during prosperity, when the economy booms along without government assistance.
The only cliff America faces is economic, not fiscal. An austerity budget when the nation is tottering can only push the entire economy off a cliff.
"Uncertainty fuels doubt." -- Christine Lagarde, managing director, International Monetary Fund
"The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt
"No man is an island, entire of itself." -- John Donne
America is not a closed economy.
Austerity wrings funds from those who can afford it least.
News items: Ireland faces at least two more years of austerity. The UK economic tide may be out for five years. Governments in Greece and Spain are facing bankruptcy.
Germany is prosperous, but reluctant to bail out others in the EU, and many in Europe don't trust them anyway.
The United States accounts for about 20 percent of the total world output, so any substantial dip in America will affect other nations, and an austerity program will send an economic tsunami to other shores. Moreover, reductions elsewhere also affect us.
Sound frightening? It should, because it has happened before, 80 years ago. In a vain effort to protect American business, the Smoot-Hawley tariffs effectively stopped foreign-made products from entering the U.S. But it also triggered retaliation by others, building tariff walls around the world. Result: International trade hit those walls and business stopped. This protectionism, coupled with demands for a balanced federal budget, only worsened an already serious problem.
Today, demands for austerity may lead to a balanced federal budget, but at what cost? We define austerity as tax hikes and spending cuts to reach budget goals. Thus, the public will have less money as they pay more in taxes, and employees will have less income as the government reduces spending.
The goal may be laudable, but the method is harsh.
In short, the time to seek a balanced budget is during prosperity, when the economy booms along without government assistance.
The only cliff America faces is economic, not fiscal. An austerity budget when the nation is tottering can only push the entire economy off a cliff.
Attribution Anxiety
A long distance between subject and verb creates separation anxiety in the reader.
Question: How long should a reader wait between a subject's name and a verb indicating what he or she says or does?
Answer: Not long, yet some writers insert many words, phrases and commas between the two.
Result: The reader has to puzzle out of memory the who or what before connecting to the action or the quote.
Example: Abercrombie Gidznick, 37, secretary of the Construction Engineers of America, New Jersey Chapter 17, and former president of the National Association of Industrial Designers of the U.S., yesterday said ...
Worse: After all that introductory stuff, the writer finally gets around to indicating what Mr. Gidznick said.
Solution: Start the sentence with the quote, then add "according to" and string out as many attribution phrases as you like.
Remember: The important thing is what was said, then who said it.
Hint: While the Verb-Subject construction may be technically correct according to the grammarian's rules, few people actually talk that way. And never use "aver." It's not a verb people generally use when talking, averred he.
Bottom line thought: Who are you trying to impress? I know, the pronoun should be "whom," but I'm not trying to impress youm.
Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
Question: How long should a reader wait between a subject's name and a verb indicating what he or she says or does?
Answer: Not long, yet some writers insert many words, phrases and commas between the two.
Result: The reader has to puzzle out of memory the who or what before connecting to the action or the quote.
Example: Abercrombie Gidznick, 37, secretary of the Construction Engineers of America, New Jersey Chapter 17, and former president of the National Association of Industrial Designers of the U.S., yesterday said ...
Worse: After all that introductory stuff, the writer finally gets around to indicating what Mr. Gidznick said.
Solution: Start the sentence with the quote, then add "according to" and string out as many attribution phrases as you like.
Remember: The important thing is what was said, then who said it.
Hint: While the Verb-Subject construction may be technically correct according to the grammarian's rules, few people actually talk that way. And never use "aver." It's not a verb people generally use when talking, averred he.
Bottom line thought: Who are you trying to impress? I know, the pronoun should be "whom," but I'm not trying to impress youm.
Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
Friday, December 7, 2012
Sabotage
Data points -- The U.S. unemployment rate in November dropped to 7.7 percent. GDP, which measures the economy, rose in the third quarter. Retail sales are up. Home sales are up. Interest rates are at historic lows, a sign that cash is available and lenders are confident the loan will be repaid. And in the case of government bonds, an indication that investors are confident that their funds will be safe, regardless of rates that are, in effect, negative, since the rate of return is lower than the rate of inflation.
Meanwhile, in Washington, the Republican Party is holding the government hostage to their demands for austerity, less spending and more tax breaks for the wealthy.
Question: Why is the political opposition finding objections to any and all proposals that might help the economy -- even those that they themselves previously offered?
The answer seems clearly implicit in the question -- political opposition.
Either that, or a subconscious political death wish.
Meanwhile, in Washington, the Republican Party is holding the government hostage to their demands for austerity, less spending and more tax breaks for the wealthy.
Question: Why is the political opposition finding objections to any and all proposals that might help the economy -- even those that they themselves previously offered?
The answer seems clearly implicit in the question -- political opposition.
Either that, or a subconscious political death wish.
Ratings
Consider -- Credit card companies can obtain funds at historically low interest rates (the prime rate is 3.25 percent) yet routinely charge consumers as much as 25 percent on ordinary purchases and card balances. Even rates for "good customers" are the prime rate plus 11 percentage points.
Usury is illegal, and is defined as "unreasonably high interest rates."
As for defining what is "reasonable," ask a lawyer.
On second thought, don't.
Usury is illegal, and is defined as "unreasonably high interest rates."
As for defining what is "reasonable," ask a lawyer.
On second thought, don't.
Goals
I didn't understand it, but it got me thinking.
People write to communicate, to persuade, or to prompt thought.
Here at Editor's Revenge, we write primarily to provide information and to prompt thought, not to persuade.
Our intent is to promote thinking, and to do that, we must communicate.
People write to communicate, to persuade, or to prompt thought.
Here at Editor's Revenge, we write primarily to provide information and to prompt thought, not to persuade.
Our intent is to promote thinking, and to do that, we must communicate.
Thursday, December 6, 2012
Dream Perspective
Any home, priced right, will sell.
A home's value is the price offered by the buyer and accepted by the seller, not what the broker suggests or what the owner wishes.
Home ownership, the American Dream, has become a nightmare for many as values have plummeted and put households numerically "under water" -- the mortgage is higher than the home is worth.
But consider this perspective. Those two numbers are relevant only if the house is for sale and the proceeds are needed to pay off the mortgage. If it's not for sale and you intend to stay in the house, it doesn't matter.
We've heard this worry before, in the 1980s. Folks would buy a home for $50,000, and its value would soar to $100,000, then plummet to $80,000, leaving the owner to lament that they have "lost" $20,000. (The numbers are for example only. Actual prices differed.)
But since the home was not for sale and the family had no plans to move, they were still ahead by $30,000. It was, in effect, a "paper loss," since the house was still home, and would remain so for some years to come.
During the condo building boom, driven more by the availability of investment money than by housing demand, there were some who signed up to buy a condo while it was still under construction, hoping to sell it on completion for a quick, painless profit.
These investors then got hurt when the market collapsed. They owned a condo they did not live in and did not want but could not sell. Like taking a stock market fling, they gambled and lost.
Back then, owners were reminded that while they might not get as much for their home as they might have a year earlier, the property was not for sale a year earlier or at that time. Therefore, the numbers were not relevant. What was relevant was the original purchase price, which was often set 10 or 20 years earlier.
Today's market, however, is complicated by the fact that some owners have lost their jobs, are unable to make the mortgage payments, and must sell. In addition, they may have credit card bills to pay off and need the sale proceeds for that. These are the ones who are, indeed, metaphorically "under water."
In addition, there are those on the East Coast whose homes are in fact "under water" or swept away and destroyed by storm damage. The mortgage remains, but the home no longer exists.
A home's value is the price offered by the buyer and accepted by the seller, not what the broker suggests or what the owner wishes.
Home ownership, the American Dream, has become a nightmare for many as values have plummeted and put households numerically "under water" -- the mortgage is higher than the home is worth.
But consider this perspective. Those two numbers are relevant only if the house is for sale and the proceeds are needed to pay off the mortgage. If it's not for sale and you intend to stay in the house, it doesn't matter.
We've heard this worry before, in the 1980s. Folks would buy a home for $50,000, and its value would soar to $100,000, then plummet to $80,000, leaving the owner to lament that they have "lost" $20,000. (The numbers are for example only. Actual prices differed.)
But since the home was not for sale and the family had no plans to move, they were still ahead by $30,000. It was, in effect, a "paper loss," since the house was still home, and would remain so for some years to come.
During the condo building boom, driven more by the availability of investment money than by housing demand, there were some who signed up to buy a condo while it was still under construction, hoping to sell it on completion for a quick, painless profit.
These investors then got hurt when the market collapsed. They owned a condo they did not live in and did not want but could not sell. Like taking a stock market fling, they gambled and lost.
Back then, owners were reminded that while they might not get as much for their home as they might have a year earlier, the property was not for sale a year earlier or at that time. Therefore, the numbers were not relevant. What was relevant was the original purchase price, which was often set 10 or 20 years earlier.
Today's market, however, is complicated by the fact that some owners have lost their jobs, are unable to make the mortgage payments, and must sell. In addition, they may have credit card bills to pay off and need the sale proceeds for that. These are the ones who are, indeed, metaphorically "under water."
In addition, there are those on the East Coast whose homes are in fact "under water" or swept away and destroyed by storm damage. The mortgage remains, but the home no longer exists.
Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Irony
The Irish Times Education Section recently advised readers how to help children learn to spell, and used this opening sentence: "Surely with spell checkers we don't need to learn to spell?"
In the same paper on the same day, the Business Section had a story about buying real estate and ran a subheadline referring to "property inventors."
This is another example of the limited value of spell check programs. In this case, the word inventors is spelled correctly, but just happens to be the wrong word.
Until and unless inventors can teach computers semantics -- meaning and context -- spell check programs will remain just a tool -- useful, but only as good as the user.
Patterns and typographical errors
Any keyboard operator with long experience will admit that the fingers develop minds of their own, in the sense that some keystroke patterns are so common that the fingers run ahead of the brain.
Indeed, programmers are making use of the common pattern phenomenon and telling computers to anticipate what the user wants.
Again, this may be another useful tool for those who are not sure of what they want to say or how to say it, but for allegedly professional communicators, this is not a tool but an interference.
Moral: Excessive reliance on computers can be dangerous to independent thought. Beyond that, you are relying not only on the machine, but more important on the groupthink of the designer/programmer.
In short, do you want to say what you want to say, or what the groupthink machine wants you to say?
In the same paper on the same day, the Business Section had a story about buying real estate and ran a subheadline referring to "property inventors."
This is another example of the limited value of spell check programs. In this case, the word inventors is spelled correctly, but just happens to be the wrong word.
Until and unless inventors can teach computers semantics -- meaning and context -- spell check programs will remain just a tool -- useful, but only as good as the user.
Patterns and typographical errors
Any keyboard operator with long experience will admit that the fingers develop minds of their own, in the sense that some keystroke patterns are so common that the fingers run ahead of the brain.
Indeed, programmers are making use of the common pattern phenomenon and telling computers to anticipate what the user wants.
Again, this may be another useful tool for those who are not sure of what they want to say or how to say it, but for allegedly professional communicators, this is not a tool but an interference.
Moral: Excessive reliance on computers can be dangerous to independent thought. Beyond that, you are relying not only on the machine, but more important on the groupthink of the designer/programmer.
In short, do you want to say what you want to say, or what the groupthink machine wants you to say?
Monday, December 3, 2012
Fame vs Notoriety
What should be and what is, are different
To call someone famous is only to say that person is well known. It says little about goodness, although some equate the two. Fame and notoriety are both judgmental, with the first carrying some connotation that being well known is because that person is popular and good.
However, consider this. Some are skilled at manipulating the news media. That is, they know how to publicize themselves, or they hire someone who does have such skills -- a press agent or publicist. Such a strategy generates media exposure and makes them well known, and projects "a good image."
But are they really good people? That's another story.
The concept that journalists need to be aware of is how easy it is to get "good ink," as PR folks and spinmeisters call it.
Things to remember --
There's a thin line between news and gossip.
The secret of good writing is not in knowing what to put in, but in knowing what to leave out.
The story hasn't been written that can't be cut.
If you can't tell it in 500 words, you can't tell it.
To call someone famous is only to say that person is well known. It says little about goodness, although some equate the two. Fame and notoriety are both judgmental, with the first carrying some connotation that being well known is because that person is popular and good.
However, consider this. Some are skilled at manipulating the news media. That is, they know how to publicize themselves, or they hire someone who does have such skills -- a press agent or publicist. Such a strategy generates media exposure and makes them well known, and projects "a good image."
But are they really good people? That's another story.
The concept that journalists need to be aware of is how easy it is to get "good ink," as PR folks and spinmeisters call it.
Things to remember --
There's a thin line between news and gossip.
The secret of good writing is not in knowing what to put in, but in knowing what to leave out.
The story hasn't been written that can't be cut.
If you can't tell it in 500 words, you can't tell it.
Sunday, December 2, 2012
Wordsmanship
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master — that's all."
Words change their meaning over time, and the pace of change varies. New words come and old words go, and those who look for a pattern find only social variations.
Five decades ago, the word "gay" had no hint of sexual orientation, and the verb "diss," to insult or disrespect someone, had not come into general usage.
At that time, a used car could be had for less than $100, and $2 would fill up the gas tank. But times change, and so does language usage.
In a way, Humpty Dumpty the master linguist was right. Words mean only what people -- speakers and hearers -- intend them to mean. And if the hearer or reader does not grasp the intended meaning, the speaker or writer has failed the mission.
And that, friends, is the primary purpose of language: to communicate.
Granted, language changes, and there are regional as well as social variations in any language -- they're called dialects.
It is a writer's duty to aim prose at the intended audience. Academics do not use rap dialect, and rappers would be ignored if they were to use the polysyllabic, convoluted prose favored by academics.
This is not to say that they cannot or should not use various dialects and styles. The goal, after all, is communication.
Words mean what the general audience accepts them to mean. Otherwise, the speaker/writer is chattering gibberish.
Therefore, heed the words of Humpty Dumpty: "The question is, which is to be master."
Or those of Albert Einstein: "If you can't explain it to a six-year-old, you don't understand it yourself."
In sum, know your audience.
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master — that's all."
Words change their meaning over time, and the pace of change varies. New words come and old words go, and those who look for a pattern find only social variations.
Five decades ago, the word "gay" had no hint of sexual orientation, and the verb "diss," to insult or disrespect someone, had not come into general usage.
At that time, a used car could be had for less than $100, and $2 would fill up the gas tank. But times change, and so does language usage.
In a way, Humpty Dumpty the master linguist was right. Words mean only what people -- speakers and hearers -- intend them to mean. And if the hearer or reader does not grasp the intended meaning, the speaker or writer has failed the mission.
And that, friends, is the primary purpose of language: to communicate.
Granted, language changes, and there are regional as well as social variations in any language -- they're called dialects.
It is a writer's duty to aim prose at the intended audience. Academics do not use rap dialect, and rappers would be ignored if they were to use the polysyllabic, convoluted prose favored by academics.
This is not to say that they cannot or should not use various dialects and styles. The goal, after all, is communication.
Words mean what the general audience accepts them to mean. Otherwise, the speaker/writer is chattering gibberish.
Therefore, heed the words of Humpty Dumpty: "The question is, which is to be master."
Or those of Albert Einstein: "If you can't explain it to a six-year-old, you don't understand it yourself."
In sum, know your audience.
Saturday, December 1, 2012
Word Smithers
When not sure of the meaning of a word, try taking it apart.
The word "acronym" has been enjoying wider usage, and has been applied to any set of initials. But the word itself is derived from two Greek components, acro- as in high, and -nym as in name or word. Thus, "high word," or a word formed by using capital letters, or the initial letters of a phrase. Examples include "radar," from Radio Direction And Ranging, or "laser," from Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation. NATO is another, formed from North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
In brief, if you can pronounce it as a word, it's an acronym. If not, it's a set of initials. IBM, CIA, and FBI are not acronyms, since you cannot pronounce them as words.
And while it's true that some more recent dictionaries may recognize the use of acronym in referring to just a set of initials, it's good to keep in mind that some dictionaries function more as history books, describing what people say, rather than as law books, which stipulate what people should say.
Meanwhile, use acronym if you can pronounce the initials as a word. If not, don't.
A question came in about the use of the word "gingerly." It refers to something being done cautiously and carefully. It has little to do with ginger, the spice, unless you feel that a little goes a long way, and the spice is to be used cautiously.
Some words become suddenly popular and are fads, finding their way into nearly every conversation and news report. Such a word is "iconic." Properly used, it refers to something that is a prime example of a set, or is one of a kind and easily recognized. Recently, news reporters have been using "iconic" every time they report on anything that is easily recognized, even if it's not very attractive.
Another is the weather forecasters' fascination with "nor'-easter," to refer to any storm of consequence coming out of the northeast. And we are suddenly overwhelmed with products that are "artisanal," as if every product on the shelf is hand-crafted by artisans. I don't think so.
News writers have fallen for the military's reference to opposing forces as "fighters," rather than as "soldiers," and to their bombs as "improvised explosive devices." It seems the military feels that using other terms somehow diminishes the legitimacy of the people and their weapons and tactics.
Remember, one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter. The British government in the 18th Century referred to General Washington's army as rebels, not soldiers. Similarly, in the early 20th Century, rebels in Ireland were known as terrorists, but to the Irish they were freedom fighters.
The word "acronym" has been enjoying wider usage, and has been applied to any set of initials. But the word itself is derived from two Greek components, acro- as in high, and -nym as in name or word. Thus, "high word," or a word formed by using capital letters, or the initial letters of a phrase. Examples include "radar," from Radio Direction And Ranging, or "laser," from Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation. NATO is another, formed from North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
In brief, if you can pronounce it as a word, it's an acronym. If not, it's a set of initials. IBM, CIA, and FBI are not acronyms, since you cannot pronounce them as words.
And while it's true that some more recent dictionaries may recognize the use of acronym in referring to just a set of initials, it's good to keep in mind that some dictionaries function more as history books, describing what people say, rather than as law books, which stipulate what people should say.
Meanwhile, use acronym if you can pronounce the initials as a word. If not, don't.
A question came in about the use of the word "gingerly." It refers to something being done cautiously and carefully. It has little to do with ginger, the spice, unless you feel that a little goes a long way, and the spice is to be used cautiously.
Some words become suddenly popular and are fads, finding their way into nearly every conversation and news report. Such a word is "iconic." Properly used, it refers to something that is a prime example of a set, or is one of a kind and easily recognized. Recently, news reporters have been using "iconic" every time they report on anything that is easily recognized, even if it's not very attractive.
Another is the weather forecasters' fascination with "nor'-easter," to refer to any storm of consequence coming out of the northeast. And we are suddenly overwhelmed with products that are "artisanal," as if every product on the shelf is hand-crafted by artisans. I don't think so.
News writers have fallen for the military's reference to opposing forces as "fighters," rather than as "soldiers," and to their bombs as "improvised explosive devices." It seems the military feels that using other terms somehow diminishes the legitimacy of the people and their weapons and tactics.
Remember, one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter. The British government in the 18th Century referred to General Washington's army as rebels, not soldiers. Similarly, in the early 20th Century, rebels in Ireland were known as terrorists, but to the Irish they were freedom fighters.
Euro Virus
With a couple of exceptions, a fiscal virus is spreading through the nations of the European Union. And since the financial market is a worldwide bourse, the virus may spread to America.
Recent economic statistics show a recovery under way in the U.S., but many nations across the pond are still struggling.
Third quarter GDP in America grew by 2.7 percent, according to the number crunchers, with the unemployment rate dropping. In Europe, meanwhile, the recession continues and the jobless rate rises.
During the same period, Gross Domestic Product (GDP), a generally accepted gauge of economic performance, and adjusted for seasonal variations, fell by about half a percentage point in both the 17 countries that use the euro as their national currency, as well as in all 27 countries of the European Union.
The unemployment rate throughout Europe during October reached an all time high of 11.7 percent, up from 11.6 percent the month before and 10.4 percent a year ago. In the U.S., the jobless rate has dropped below 10 percent.
And while Democrats in America luxuriate in the warmth of improving statistics, the chief of the European Central Bank warns that the euro won't recover from crisis until late next year. Moreover, government austerity will stunt economic growth.
The exceptions to the European economic malaise are Germany and Austria, where the unemployment rate is steady or falling. In Germany, the rate is steady at 5.4 percent, and in Austria, the jobless rate dropped a notch to just 4.3 percent, according to published data. Unemployment in Spain, meanwhile, rose to 26.2 percent, and in Italy to 11.1 percent.
The obvious consequence of the differing rates is that those in the south of Europe without jobs will migrate to the areas where workers are needed. It's the same phenomenon that has brought workers to America. People go where the jobs are.
The lesson for America is to avoid the fear factor, and not let the financial specter haunting Europe emigrate to the U.S.
This fear factor has pushed governments to reduce spending to bring down borrowing rates, and bankers have been reluctant to lend, making less cash available for private sector investment, which leads to less hiring and more unemployment, which leads to less consumer spending, which aggravates a recessionary trend.
The borrowing cost (interest rate) for the Spanish government is above 5 percent, compared to less than 2 percent for Germany. The American government's borrowing cost also remains extremely low, a market indication of fiscal health. Investor yields for two-year and five-year notes have fallen below 1 percent, and for ten-year Treasury securities below 2 percent.
This means that the U.S. government -- and that of Germany -- can easily borrow in the world financial market to finance its spending plans, while the government of Spain cannot.
But fear can carry a fiscal virus, leading to calls for austerity here, even as such calls are heard in Spain and other European nations. And if the money flow is blocked, a national economy suffers a painful stroke.
Yet there are some who say a nation must endure the pain and patiently wait for the private sector to rescue itself.
This, too, shall pass, they say. Such an attitude works well for those who have the wherewithal to endure. As for those who are not as fortunate . . .
Recent economic statistics show a recovery under way in the U.S., but many nations across the pond are still struggling.
Third quarter GDP in America grew by 2.7 percent, according to the number crunchers, with the unemployment rate dropping. In Europe, meanwhile, the recession continues and the jobless rate rises.
During the same period, Gross Domestic Product (GDP), a generally accepted gauge of economic performance, and adjusted for seasonal variations, fell by about half a percentage point in both the 17 countries that use the euro as their national currency, as well as in all 27 countries of the European Union.
The unemployment rate throughout Europe during October reached an all time high of 11.7 percent, up from 11.6 percent the month before and 10.4 percent a year ago. In the U.S., the jobless rate has dropped below 10 percent.
And while Democrats in America luxuriate in the warmth of improving statistics, the chief of the European Central Bank warns that the euro won't recover from crisis until late next year. Moreover, government austerity will stunt economic growth.
The exceptions to the European economic malaise are Germany and Austria, where the unemployment rate is steady or falling. In Germany, the rate is steady at 5.4 percent, and in Austria, the jobless rate dropped a notch to just 4.3 percent, according to published data. Unemployment in Spain, meanwhile, rose to 26.2 percent, and in Italy to 11.1 percent.
The obvious consequence of the differing rates is that those in the south of Europe without jobs will migrate to the areas where workers are needed. It's the same phenomenon that has brought workers to America. People go where the jobs are.
The lesson for America is to avoid the fear factor, and not let the financial specter haunting Europe emigrate to the U.S.
This fear factor has pushed governments to reduce spending to bring down borrowing rates, and bankers have been reluctant to lend, making less cash available for private sector investment, which leads to less hiring and more unemployment, which leads to less consumer spending, which aggravates a recessionary trend.
The borrowing cost (interest rate) for the Spanish government is above 5 percent, compared to less than 2 percent for Germany. The American government's borrowing cost also remains extremely low, a market indication of fiscal health. Investor yields for two-year and five-year notes have fallen below 1 percent, and for ten-year Treasury securities below 2 percent.
This means that the U.S. government -- and that of Germany -- can easily borrow in the world financial market to finance its spending plans, while the government of Spain cannot.
But fear can carry a fiscal virus, leading to calls for austerity here, even as such calls are heard in Spain and other European nations. And if the money flow is blocked, a national economy suffers a painful stroke.
Yet there are some who say a nation must endure the pain and patiently wait for the private sector to rescue itself.
This, too, shall pass, they say. Such an attitude works well for those who have the wherewithal to endure. As for those who are not as fortunate . . .
Thursday, November 29, 2012
Drifting
All news is local.
We hear a lot about ocean-borne debris fouling the beaches of Hawaii and America's West Coast as a result of the earthquake and tsunami in Japan.
Will we hear as much about debris from storm damage on America's East Coast fouling beaches in Europe?
Don't mess with Mother Nature. She'll get you in the end.
For those who deny global warming, ask them when they last saw ice skating on Central Park Lake in Manhattan, or on any local pond. Or ask the Flexible Flyer company about sled sales. Or ask why some bird species no longer migrate. Or ask why mockingbirds are no longer limited to the American South.
The issue is not whether the climate is changing, but how much people contribute to it, and how we can change our ways so we don't self-destruct.
Justice is blind. And sometimes more than that.
The Shooda Stood in Bed Award goes to the Italian weather forecasters who faced criminal charges for not predicting the extent of earthquake damage.
The Why Bother Award goes to those in Europe who require folks to purchase travelers insurance. Unless you're over 65, in which case you are rejected because of age and you can't get it even if you do want it.
We hear a lot about ocean-borne debris fouling the beaches of Hawaii and America's West Coast as a result of the earthquake and tsunami in Japan.
Will we hear as much about debris from storm damage on America's East Coast fouling beaches in Europe?
Don't mess with Mother Nature. She'll get you in the end.
For those who deny global warming, ask them when they last saw ice skating on Central Park Lake in Manhattan, or on any local pond. Or ask the Flexible Flyer company about sled sales. Or ask why some bird species no longer migrate. Or ask why mockingbirds are no longer limited to the American South.
The issue is not whether the climate is changing, but how much people contribute to it, and how we can change our ways so we don't self-destruct.
Justice is blind. And sometimes more than that.
The Shooda Stood in Bed Award goes to the Italian weather forecasters who faced criminal charges for not predicting the extent of earthquake damage.
The Why Bother Award goes to those in Europe who require folks to purchase travelers insurance. Unless you're over 65, in which case you are rejected because of age and you can't get it even if you do want it.
Wednesday, November 28, 2012
Allegedly Troublesome
Don't get heartburn in the first place. -- Larry the Cable Guy
Ample use of the word "allegedly" doesn't get you off the hook and can get you in trouble.
The standards of usage are upheld by copy editors at newspapers, magazines and online publications in America and other English-speaking countries around the world.
They are unknown and unsung. They get no bylines, yet they save those who do from looking foolish every day. It is serious work, with serious consequences.
This is not to say that copy editors are humorless and always take themselves seriously. Some of the best one-liners ever perpetrated have come from copy editors -- many are unprintable and understandable only in the context of the moment.
A rule learned early by every good writer and copy editor is this: If you don't want to see it in print, don't put it in the computer. And don't rely on the next guy to invoke the CYA rule and take it out or otherwise fix it. Do it yourself. (CYA = "cover your a...")
If you must make jokes with the copy, keep it verbal.
This rule was forgotten by the copy editor who inserted "allegedly born in Hawaii" into a story about the President, and expected the next editor to catch the joke and delete the word "allegedly." He didn't.
Ample use of the word "allegedly" doesn't get you off the hook and can get you in trouble.
The standards of usage are upheld by copy editors at newspapers, magazines and online publications in America and other English-speaking countries around the world.
They are unknown and unsung. They get no bylines, yet they save those who do from looking foolish every day. It is serious work, with serious consequences.
This is not to say that copy editors are humorless and always take themselves seriously. Some of the best one-liners ever perpetrated have come from copy editors -- many are unprintable and understandable only in the context of the moment.
A rule learned early by every good writer and copy editor is this: If you don't want to see it in print, don't put it in the computer. And don't rely on the next guy to invoke the CYA rule and take it out or otherwise fix it. Do it yourself. (CYA = "cover your a...")
If you must make jokes with the copy, keep it verbal.
This rule was forgotten by the copy editor who inserted "allegedly born in Hawaii" into a story about the President, and expected the next editor to catch the joke and delete the word "allegedly." He didn't.
Multiplier
If common sense is so common, how come no one thought of it before?
A genius is one who sees where others do not look.
The concept of the multiplier effect only took hold in the 1930s -- some 80 years ago -- in the lifetime of many now living. Yet it's now accepted in economics as "common sense."
Here's an example: The Haynes Kayak Co. gets an order for 100 additional boats. This requires that the company hire one more worker, who in turn spends his wages on food, clothing, shelter, etc. To get to work, he buys a car, which means more gasoline sales. More auto sales in turn generate additional income for the car sales representative, support staff including secretary, bookkeeper and mechanic, as well as gas station employes, truckers who deliver the fuel, drillers, refinery workers, engineers who operate the oil wells, and those who benefit from their additional income.
It matters not whether the additional first order came from government or from the private sector. The effect of multiplying benefits through the entire economy is the same.
A genius is one who sees where others do not look.
The concept of the multiplier effect only took hold in the 1930s -- some 80 years ago -- in the lifetime of many now living. Yet it's now accepted in economics as "common sense."
Here's an example: The Haynes Kayak Co. gets an order for 100 additional boats. This requires that the company hire one more worker, who in turn spends his wages on food, clothing, shelter, etc. To get to work, he buys a car, which means more gasoline sales. More auto sales in turn generate additional income for the car sales representative, support staff including secretary, bookkeeper and mechanic, as well as gas station employes, truckers who deliver the fuel, drillers, refinery workers, engineers who operate the oil wells, and those who benefit from their additional income.
It matters not whether the additional first order came from government or from the private sector. The effect of multiplying benefits through the entire economy is the same.
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Idle Thoughts
Q/ What do you think of open borders?
A/ Close the borders. There are too many Canadians clamoring to come here to take advantage of our health care system.
Kudos to Jon Stewart of The Daily Show for taking aim at a Fox News host and guest who lamented the changing demographics of America, with the rush of new immigrants endangering the traditional American way of life.
The host and guest were named O'Reilly and Goldberg.
A commentator noted the reluctance of the conservative wing of the GOP to see what might be happening to their party. "It's one thing to be on the Titanic. It's another not to know an iceberg has struck."
There's a need for people who can't hear "no."
There's a thin line between confidence and arrogance.
Education is never wasted.
Religionists discovered marketing as a way to spread their influence. When that didn't work, they turned to violence.
Religion begets politics, but not the reverse.
What if he got in touch with his inner Thurston Howell, but no one was home?
The TV graphic noted that the electric company replaced more than 2500 polls.
(So who needs Gallup?)
A/ Close the borders. There are too many Canadians clamoring to come here to take advantage of our health care system.
Kudos to Jon Stewart of The Daily Show for taking aim at a Fox News host and guest who lamented the changing demographics of America, with the rush of new immigrants endangering the traditional American way of life.
The host and guest were named O'Reilly and Goldberg.
A commentator noted the reluctance of the conservative wing of the GOP to see what might be happening to their party. "It's one thing to be on the Titanic. It's another not to know an iceberg has struck."
There's a need for people who can't hear "no."
There's a thin line between confidence and arrogance.
Education is never wasted.
Religionists discovered marketing as a way to spread their influence. When that didn't work, they turned to violence.
Religion begets politics, but not the reverse.
What if he got in touch with his inner Thurston Howell, but no one was home?
The TV graphic noted that the electric company replaced more than 2500 polls.
(So who needs Gallup?)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)