Form: Quote Commentary

  • Why does the right lean toward NGDP targeting?

    On Worthwhile Canadian Initiative, Nick Rowe asks “Why isn’t NGDP targeting a lefty thing?” and asks why the right seems to support it, instead of supporting inflation targeting. My reply was: Nick, I think you miss the point that from the right’s position, NGDP targeting would require that the government focus its efforts on industrial policy in order to be able to fund redistribution, and therefore cooperate rather than prey on business and industry. This in turn would require we correct our dysfunctional education system that creates uncompetitive workers, and it would reduce class warfare by focusing on specific policy initiatives that would make the nation competitive rather than devolutionary. The right originally abandoned industrial policy because of the collaboration between unions and the state. Now that they see unions as weak and foreign states as a threat, they would prefer to return to industrial policy and very likely, away from free trade – which was just a vehicle for competing against the government-union alliance while the USA had a temporary postwar technological advantage. Conservatism is the sentiment and subsequent philosophy of inter-temporal group persistence by the concentration of capital in all it’s forms. In the USA conservatism also includes an allegiance to the status quo of classical liberalism, which in itself is a commercial meritocratic philosophy that retains the english system of class cooperation through multiple houses of government. The democratic socialist movement is an attempt by the proletariat and public intellectuals to obtain political and economic power by propagating the mythos of equality in order to undermine the multi-class system of government in which tehy are at a disadvantage compared to the commercial productive classes. But it is nothing more than an appeal to power for the purpose of material gain. Nothing more and nothing less. While conservatism is more likely to rely on historical metaphor and moral argument because of their inter-temporal content, and the left is more likely to argue for empirical positivism because it specifically lacks that inter-temporal content and replaces that historical view with an absolute faith in the human ability to manage it’s own destiny, that does not mean that conservatism cannot be articulated as a rational philosophy. It simply means, that because it is more complex, it is harder to do so. But then again, concepts of this depth are usually outside of the understanding of macro economists, and are instead the provenance of political philosophers and historians to whom economic activity is a predictable cycle driven by little more than institutions, military power, trade routes, and population composition.

  • “In four years of reflection and rather intense involvement with this financial

    “In four years of reflection and rather intense involvement with this financial crisis, not a single aspect of dynamic stochastic general equilibrium has seemed worth even a passing thought. … I think the profession is not entirely innocent.” — Larry Summers


    Source date (UTC): 2011-11-11 11:29:00 UTC

  • As a geek, I love the economics of affection, dating and relationships, and foun

    As a geek, I love the economics of affection, dating and relationships, and found this quote today in line with what I’ve written. It’s from a posting about Laura Sessions Stepp’s book “hooking up”, where the writer poses an obvious economic actor’s solution to Stepp’s questions:

    “Why do young women make themselves so available, unmarried, to young men in hopes of making themselves happy? (This clearly makes the young men happy, but that’s beside the point).”

    “This downward spiral that women have been caught in — the dwindling supply of available men — induces women to make themselves even more sexually available than the next women in order to compete, thereby further dampening the supply of potential mates—seems impossible to break out of. At the heart of the problem is a classic, Olsonian collective action failure. All women would benefit if, collectively, women were to require more of men they had sex with. But every woman knows that her behavior, by itself, will not cause market prices to change, so she cheats—and by “cheats” I mean she cheats the female collective. The problem with this free riding behavior is that everyone faces the same incentives and there is not an effective punishment for cheating. The result: men get more sex and women can’t find mates.”


    Source date (UTC): 2011-11-04 20:39:00 UTC

  • Why 30 Large Companies Paid Only 18% Tax

    Rick writes:

    RE: “One big one is accelerated depreciation that lets them write off equipment faster than it actually wears out. Deductions on executive stock options help. So do tax breaks for research and development and for making products in the United States instead of overseas. Offshore tax shelters play a role, too.”

    They enacted accelerated depreciation because the usa has the second highest total corporate tax burden in teh world, second only to japan. And this tax burden is equally distributed against low risk companies like the financial, legal, accounting, and other services sectors as well as the high risk companies that require significant capital investment in order to function. So what was happening, because of this extremely high corporate tax rate, was that high capital investment companies were going broke or leaving the country, depriving the country of unskilled, and low skilled, labor-class jobs. For example, the state says that your laptop must be depreciated over three to five years, however, in reality, it becomes almost valueless the moment you buy it. IN this way the state artificially increase profits and increases taxes on those profits by disallowing companies to expense things like laptops at the low end and mechanical equipment at the high end. This process effectively forces heavy industry to be uncompetitive on the world stage where other nations actively subsidize those heavy industry investments. These tax breaks effectively BUY JOBS that would depart if not. IN the case of power companies, it makes no sense to tax them if the all it does is pass through costs for energy to consumers. So we are BUYING cheaper energy for consumers by offering tax breaks to them. Executive stock options are not ‘real’. The purpose of stock options is to create an incentive for execs to increase the value of a company for shareholders. Options differ from stock in that they are not taxable until you exercise them. If you grant stock to someone they have to pay taxes on it now, despite the fact that no one has made any money yet. That would be like asking you to pay your taxes for the year, before you could take a job and earn the income. Options differ in that they give people incentives even though they are rarely paid out except in public companies, but that the employee only earns income if the stock appreciates in value – ie: they were successful. Offshore income is necessary because most corporations make their money these days outside the country. If they did not, then they might not even exist. We give shelters to people and companies because if we didn’t they would just circumvent the system or they would leave teh country entirely because the opportunities in the developing world are higher than they are domestically. The majority of depositors in swiss accounts are average european citizens who are hiding their incomes from high taxes so that they can retire safely and in some degree of comfort. Europeans rarely own homes and they tend to live in apartments, and so they do not have home equity to rely upon at retirement. If you want to tax goldman sachs you won’t get any complaints. But politicians making tax policy are far more rational than we think they are

  • Positive news from Karl: “Non-residential fixed investment is on fire. Equipment

    Positive news from Karl:

    “Non-residential fixed investment is on fire. Equipment and Software is burning it up at a 17% growth rate. Indeed, non-residential fixed investment contributed almost as much to growth as did consumption. Not grew at the same rate as consumption, but the absolute increase in business investment was almost as great as the absolute increase in consumption.”

    “An open question is how long this blistering level of Business Investment can keep going. It’s a little crazy at this point. We are still below normal on capacity utilization. Real retail sales have yet to make new highs.”


    Source date (UTC): 2011-10-30 14:35:00 UTC

  • is much easier for poor countries to grow faster than it is for rich countries b

    http://blog-imfdirect.imf.org/2011/10/21/growing-pains-europes-dilemma/”It is much easier for poor countries to grow faster than it is for rich countries because they can import technology they do not already have. It is much more difficult to grow fast if you are already rich and at the technology frontier—now you can only get richer by innovation.” -Bas Bakker

    This is a basic law of economics. It’s immutable. But that doesn’t stop people from ignoring it….


    Source date (UTC): 2011-10-21 15:18:00 UTC

  • Nye writes more on Status Signals: “because the West is much richer, positional

    http://www.econlib.org/library/Columns/Nyepositional.htmlJohn Nye writes more on Status Signals: “because the West is much richer, positional or status goods are consequently more important. The struggle over status goods can be masked when you have rapid growth and a lot of mobility. But ultimately, middle and upper middle class people DO care more about health care, location of housing, and elite schooling than poorer people. “

    In marketing, advertising and politics, social signaling matters. Now, my argument is that it’s impossible to have a complex society without social signals. So my argument is that social signals are NECESSARY. Just like money and numbers are necessary. Because we would would literally not be able to THINK if we didn’t have status signals. Just like we wouldn’t be able to THINK if we didn’t have prices.


    Source date (UTC): 2011-10-19 12:38:00 UTC

  • “The Department of Transportation found that, in 2009, commutes by private car t

    “The Department of Transportation found that, in 2009, commutes by private car took, on average, 23 minutes. Public transportation, by contrast, took an average of 53 minutes. “

    Public transportation is slow. It’s loud. It’s ugly, and it’s dirty. It’s only suitable for people with very regular schedules. It dampens consumption. It’s absurdly expensive per person – particularly rail. It feeds the public sector bureaucracy. It allows large corporations to get subsidized labor rather than pay increased wages. And frankly, it’s unsanitary. So, it’s all well and good that downtown cores make use of public transportation. But otherwise, we’d be better off giving people zero interest used car loans. I realize some people love it. And as a resident of downtown Boston I appreciated it – when I wasn’t freezing to death in the wind chill. But I don’t have the regular schedule, the extra hour a day to waste, plus the extra time on either side of the work day, nor the time to make separate trips for groceries and what-not. Even in Germany almost eighty percent of the population commutes by car. I’m glad that some people think it’s sensible. But the math doesn’t make sense to me at all.


    Source date (UTC): 2011-10-18 06:30:00 UTC

  • Reality 101

    http://www.wired.com/magazine/2011/08/st_qareis/Entrepreneurial Reality 101


    Source date (UTC): 2011-09-21 08:57:00 UTC

  • collection of studies: Intuition vs Reflection – cognitive styles affect belief

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21928924?dopt=AbstractInteresting collection of studies: Intuition vs Reflection – cognitive styles affect belief in Gods. Fascinating. In retrospect, obvious. 🙂


    Source date (UTC): 2011-09-21 08:30:00 UTC