Relevant and even prescient commentary on news, politics and the economy.

Here is Andrew Coulson Series on Virtues of Privatization

Diane Ravitch offers more on schools in America:


Here is Andrew Coulson Series on Virtues of Privatization

by dianeravitch

Watch libertarian Andrew Coulson’s film, now showing on some, not all, PBS stations around the nation.

It was paid for by libertarian foundations that support privatization. The lead funder–the Rose-Mary and Jack Anderson Foundation– is a conduit for the Koch brothers and DeVos family foundations.

http://www.pbs.org/show/school-inc/

Here is my response.

Carol Burris and I will soon be posting a point by point refutation.

Please let PBS know what you think.

Comments (3) | |

American carnage?

Institute for New Economic Thinking Lance Taylor describes his thinking on the great divide.  Worth a look:

President Trump, in his inaugural address and elsewhere, rightly says that over the decades since 1980 American household distributions of income and wealth became strikingly unequal. But if recent budget and legislative proposals from Trump and the House of Representatives come into effect, today’s distributional mess would become visibly worse.

First, I will sketch how the mess happened, then I will propose some ideas about how it might be cleaned up. I will show that even with lucky institutional changes and good policy, it would take several more decades to undo the “American carnage” that the president described.

Comments (2) | |

New book on investment incentives will help shape policies debates for years to come

Lifted from Middle Class Political Economist is the announcement related to  Angry Bear Dr. Kenneth Thomas video series

Wednesday, June 29, 2016

New book on investment incentives will help shape policies debates for years to come

This past week I received my chapter author’s copy of a new book from Columbia University Press, Rethinking Investment Incentives: Trends and Policy Options. Based initially on the November 2013 conference on investment incentives at Columbia Law School, the contributors were put through their paces to upgrade their conference presentations into proper papers. The result is what Theodore Moran of Georgetown University calls in the Foreword “a who’s-who of experts across this broad span of topics.” He predicts, and I concur, that the work presented in this book will help drive policy discussions around the globe.
The book is divided into four parts. The first discusses theoretical debates on definitions and the effect of these incentives on (especially) foreign direct investment. The second section provides a global overview of the use of incentive incentives, both in major economies and in developing countries. Part III includes practical tools for ensuring program effectiveness as well as value for money. This includes a chapter on cost-benefit analysis, a methodology of which I am highly skeptical. As I have written before, if you end this analysis at the state (or city!) border, you miss many of the indirect job losses inflicted at competing companies by the addition of new subsidized competition. Indeed, according to economist Tim Bartik, very few subsidy programs have positive *national* effects, even if they have positive local effects that will be the only thing considered in the cost-benefit analysis.
Finally, the fourth part of the book considers ways to reduce the competitive use of investment incentives to attract investment. My chapter falls in this section, considering the control of subnational incentives in Australia, Canada, and the United States. (Spoiler: Most of the record is not pretty; Australia was an exception but the policy expired in 2011.) A variety of supranational regulatory efforts, including most notably that of the European Union, are considered in a chapter by Lise Johnson.
Have I teased you enough yet? This book is a must-have if you are interested in investment incentives and economic development; co-editors Ana Teresa Tavares-Lehmann (University of Porto, Portugal), Perrine Toledano, Lise Johnson, and Lisa Sachs (all of the Columbia Center for Sustainable Investment) are to be congratulated for the fine product.

Comments (1) | |

Many places in America are essentially devoid of doctors

Via Kevin MD Dr. Kenneth Lin writes another article on disappearing rural medical care.  this is part of the article…

I recently attended a conference in Savannah, Georgia sponsored by the Association for Prevention Teaching and Research.

Since I haven’t spent much time in Georgia outside of Savannah and Atlanta, the welcoming plenary on improving health outcomes for the state’s rural and underserved populations was eye-opening. According to Dr. Keisha Callins, Chair of the Department of Community Medicine at Mercer University, Georgia ranked 39th out of 50 states in primary care physician supply in 2013 and is projected to be last by 2020. 90 percent of Georgia’s counties are medically underserved. Mercer supports several pipeline programs that actively recruit students from rural areas, expose all students early to rural practice and community health, and provide financial incentives for graduates who choose to work in underserved areas of the state. But it’s an uphill battle. Even replicated in many medical schools across the country, these kinds of programs likely won’t attract enough doctors to rural areas where they are most needed.

When people talk about places where doctors won’t go, they tend to focus on international destinations, such as war zones in Syria or sparsely populated areas of sub-Saharan Africa. It’s hard to believe that many places in America are essentially devoid of doctors, and access to medical care is as limited as in countries where average income is a tiny fraction of that in the U.S. Providing health care coverage for everyone, while important, won’t automatically ensure the availability of health professionals and resources in rural communities. In a recent JAMA Forum piece, Diana Mason discussed the financial struggles of rural hospitals that support community health alongside primary care clinicians, which may become more acute if budget cuts to rural health programs and grants occur as proposed in President Trump’s budget.

Comments (11) | |

One Ohio Town’s Immigration Clash, Down in the Actual Muck

NYT has an interesting article that might provide readers with the details of not only immigration but labor, food supply, agriculture in a mixed reaction to such issues.  I also wonder if planting went smoothly, for instance, as the details of lives get lost in the simplicities of bumper sticker, all or none politics.  This is of course only one small sector of of an economy affected by immigration but sometimes a story offers much insight if I ask the right questions as it develops and figure out what this city boy doesn’t know.  How could this community come to terms with its problems and strengths?

For decades, the farmers have relied on migrant labor from spring to fall. Depending on how quickly they work, field workers can earn up to $18 an hour, compared with Ohio’s $8.15 minimum hourly wage. Many return year after year to do the strenuous seasonal work, sometimes in temperatures that soar to 100 degrees. (Local residents largely steer clear.)

Seven in 10 field workers nationwide are undocumented, according to estimates by the American Farm Bureau Federation. In Willard, it is probably no different.

“Without the Hispanic labor force, we wouldn’t be able to grow crops,” said Ben Wiers, a great-grandson of the pioneer Henry Wiers, who bought five acres here in 1896, noting that he considers many workers at Wiers Farms, which cultivates more than 1,000 acres of produce under the Dutch Maid label, to be friends.

But beefed-up border enforcement has slowed the flow of workers who enter the country illegally. Last year, a shortage forced Mr. Wiers and the other growers to leave millions of dollars’ worth of produce in the fields.

Comments (13) | |

Rethinking rural hospitals

Via Journel of American Medical Association (JAMA) is an invitation us to keep looking at the plight of rural hospitals in light of decreasing rural population. Dr. Diana Mason writes:

But other rural communities, home to nearly 20% of the US population, are not so fortunate. Since 2010, 78 of the more than 2150 rural nonspecialty US hospitals have closed. While the closure rate has recently declined, the proportion of financially struggling rural hospitals has increased. When a rural hospital closes, the economic losses can devastate an already stressed community through loss of health care workers, emergency services, and primary care capacity, as well as higher unemployment and lower per-capita income, a drop in housing values, poorer health, and increasing health disparities.

Why are rural hospitals at higher risk of closure than urban hospitals? George Pink, PhD, Deputy Director of the North Carolina Rural Health Research Program, sees 3 main contributors:

  • Market factors. Rural areas tend to have poorer population health, higher unemployment rates, and stiffer competition from other hospitals
  • Hospital factors. These include low occupancy rates, lack of physician coverage, deteriorating facilities, and patient safety concerns
  • Financial factors. From 2012 to 2014, for example, rural hospitals averaged a 2% operating margin, compared with 5.9% for urban hospitals

Comments (12) | |

Kaiser Health News on lead and baby foods

From Kaiser Health News points to other general sources of lead than paint and water:

The Environmental Defense Fund, in an analysis of 11 years of federal data, found detectable levels of lead in 20 percent of 2,164 baby food samples. The toxic metal was most commonly found in fruit juices such as grape and apple, root vegetables such as sweet potatoes and carrots, and cookies such as teething biscuits.

The organization’s primary focus was on the baby foods because of how detrimental lead can be to child development.

According to the FDA, lead makes its way into food through contaminated soil, but Neltner suspects that processing may also play a role.

“I can’t explain it other than I assume baby food is processed more,” Neltner said.

The Environmental Defense Fund report notes that more research on the sources of contamination is needed.

FDA has set guidance levels of 100 parts per billion (ppb) for candy and dried fruit and 50 ppb for fruit juices. The allowable level for lead in bottled water is 5 ppb.

Concern over fruit juices flared up in 2012 when Consumer Reports found that 1 in 4 samples of apple and grape juices had lead levels higher than the FDA’s bottled-water limit of 5 ppb.

The Environmental Defense Fund report was ultimately directed at the food industry and FDA in the hopes of getting limits and standards updated.

Comments (0) | |