Kharris has questioned my credibility directly, my integrity indirectly, and has questioned the credibility and integrity of this site. His facts are off, but the he/she and the Bears deserve a response anyway.
So, I am going to do two things:
1) Send Rdan a summary of some of my research, publication and seminar materials from the past five years or so, which I just happened to be putting together for another purpose. I won’t bore him with the 30 years before that.
2) Write a brief explanation below of my experience.
Then I will ask Rdan to review my credibility, and if he finds I lack credibility I want him to announce same to the entire blogosphere and i will slink away, banished. If any other Bears find that I have claimed credibility outside my field they may post that for the world to see, and I may slink away anyway.
So Kharris – smackdown.
I have not practiced solely or primarily as an accountant since 1977. I have never worked much with hospitals, only in terms of IDS or linkages to other providers.
I define nationally respected expertise as being asked to write, lecture, or analyze public policy for a major national health care organization or publication. Accordingly I fit that designation in:
physician group management ambulatory surgery centers nursing facilities, assisted living and seniors housing
I have experience but much less inpressive credentials in
imaging centers physical therapy urgent/immediate care centers drug abuse components of mental health programs general public health disaster services youth camp medical services
Rdan may note some of my recent expertise as 1) financial viability of physician groups 2) regulatory and management issues in nursing facilities 3) billing integrity, compliance and fraud issues 4) contracting issues and compliance 5) HIPAA 6) training 7) HR 8) financial modeling and many other issues.
Outside of health care, and much less obvious, I am known as an expert on business ethics, wage-and-hour compliance, operational auditing as a management tool and internal controls across a wide range of organizations, and of course rustbelt economic problems.
So Kharris, SMACKDOWN.
Rdan, if I do not fit my claims, please announce that I have been banished.
Rusty, don’t let KH get under your skin. He is just another serial, hit and run, angry commenter. I have seen him use his tactics on others sites, and have called him out for it here.
His MO has been to drop by, slip in a bomb, and then not respond to comments. He has recently appeared to return and respond with more angry commentary when confronted.
BTW, he does/did take offense at being called a woman. Even though he may act like he is PMS afflicted. But, that is not usually an ongoing daily affliction. Go figure?
So, Rusty, don’t let his kind of mindless, emotional commentary get to you. He’s not worth the energy.
i’d have said it another way. kharris has been unkind to me in comments. and sometimes i agree with him (her?). it’s all part of the blog experience. nothing to get upset about.
Well Rusty, I knew a lot of your background from our communications over the last several years. Why kharris took this tack is unknown. There is another commenter who has taken this approach somewhat with Linda in particular.
Commenters may differ with the particular approach or tone and certainly offer source and other material, but have no grounds to impugn qualifications and character. All Bears are well qualified, and in particular you are well qualified in experience for health care issues among others.
The only banishing might be for commenters who persist in this kind of attack. Such an ‘editorial policy’ is non-negotiable with me, since you asked. The policy we have is well defined and public A commenter can even dislike a post’s approach and say why….but do not attack the author.
What can I say to your request Rusty? You are an AB author who has full confidence from me in particular and other Bears.
CoRev has a point as well for this set of comments.
Don’t you dare try to equate me with Kharris. Linda is leftwing flamethrower with an attitude. As a linguistics lawyer from a state school without a significant background in economics she just does not have the intellectual horsepower to denounce the entire economics department at the University of Chicago. I would discuss the efficient market hypothesis with her but she does not understand what it is or care to learn about it.
Linda is faking it which would become apparent if she ever decides to try to defend one of her outrageous columns. Everything cactus was claiming broke down when you looked more closely at the economic history and read the papers of people like Christina Romer. It would happen faster with Linda.
By the way, how many emails have you received from me requesting preferential treatment. You made a mistake when you decided to respond to others that have contracted you. So maybe you should man-up and cut them off.
I understand that you want people to write columns that get people’s attention. This explains Bruce and Linda. But they do it with cheap tricks so you should not be suprised when they get some push back.
I think of kharris as part of the AB family, and the blog wouldn’t be the same without him. The majority of his insights are spot on, and he calls out people that need to be called out, which I admire.
Following the rule of “Countervailing Forces” we not have a “Coffee Party” to counteract the “Tea Party”. Of coourse the newest is partially funded by that huge anti-conservative George Soros.
Conservative action groups, expecially those in the climate change area, are constantly accused of being funded by “Big Energy.” I guess the conservative corollary is now that liberal political action groups are funded by George Soros.
One appears more true than the other. Care to guess?
Sometimes he rants and tilts at windmills. Maybe his wife decided to have a c-section and questioning this procedure set him off this time. I think rusty’s smackdown was overkill.
She also neither backs up or has anything intelligent to say about Ronald Coase, Robert Fogel,James Heckman, or Roger Myerson. Well I do have nice things to say about Robert Fogel. A kind old man shuffling up to the lecture area reminding students that small times small equals smaller. Of course, Fogel’s brand of cliometrics wasn’t everyone’s cup of tea, but I always liked it. I’ve always had a hard time reconciling the boldness of “Time on the Cross” with the personal meekness of the author.
Soros provided money and that was all. The Tea Party founders got money from corporate donors and hired professional political organizers to stage events.
The Coffee Party stuff is more of an intellectual response and doesn’t have the passion behind it that the Tea Party movement has. Tea Party activists are enraged…to the point that they can’t even think straight. What the GOP did was to hire professionals to manipulate that raw anger. And as we learned from those RNC Powerpoint charts, they still view the Tea Party movement as something to be cynically manipulated. The problem with your analysis is that you confuse rage with a coherent political message. The old white farts that go to these Tea Party events are angry enough to become politically active and at the same time too angry to understand why they are angry. Anyone who holds up a sign that equates nazism with communism with Obama isn’t just telling us that he’s angry; he’s also telling us that he has no idea what any of those things actually mean except that all three signal a sense of alienation. Confused old women screaming at politicians about socialized medicine (as though British national health, Canadian single payer and Obama’s healthcare plan were all pretty much the same) and then demanding that the same politician keep his government hands off her Medicare….well, this is a person that is beyond rational. You can’t rationally argue someone out of a position that they didn’t rationally argue themselves into.
When the Founders worried about demogogues leading angry and unintelligent crowds, they had Dick Armey and the Tea Party movement in mind.
Ronald Coase really comes from the tradition that is known as the First Chicago School, which preceded what is today just called the Chicago School. The First Chicago School came out of the Frank Knight tradition. Gary Becker falls into this group. When people talk about the Chicago School today they usually have in mind the post-Friedman era that looked at macroeconomics as an exercise in finance and monetary policy. That’s one reason why so many of the Chicago School economists who are ranting about the stimulus package really came out of the field of finance.
And from this morning’s AP story on the Tea Party movement in NY, here’s a picture of some sorry looking teabaggers. Like I said. Old. White. Alienated. And poor penmanship. Also intellectually confused. Cutting the government’s budget is the best way that I know for that clueless woman to see her own household budget cut. I wonder what the total number of semester hours in macroeconomics you would find if you totaled up the educational history of every teabagger in this picture. My guess is zero.
Bonus picture of more hapless, white and old teabaggers. This time in St. Louis last Wednesday. Note the sign demanding jobs now, not big government. So if this teabagger wants a job now, why is he or she demanding that Obama do something about it? And even though I feel a bit sorry for this poor confused woman holding up the STOP GOVT GREED sign, you gotta chuckle at how she has managed to anthropomorphize a human failing and assigned it to a public institution. I think Anthony Downs would identify her as a “low information voter” in the original sense of the term…meaning someone who cannot understand abstract concepts and therefore has to convert problems into personal experiences and relationships. If you don’t understand Y = C + I + G + NX, then think of government as some greedy and rapacious person stealing your money.
You would think that if Linda wants to criticize the University of Chicago she would first understand the arguments that were made and have some knowledge of the history of economic thought in this country. She also neither backs up or has anything intelligent to say about Ronald Coase, Robert Fogel,James Heckman, or Roger Myerson.
So where does she get her information? It seems from kook blogging sites since she certainly does not make reasoned arguments. So what you claim against conservatives is again projection of your own behavior
2slugs, you project your personal feelings too much on too many subjects.
Macroeconomics? Climate Science? What’s the scientific difference? What’s the scientific similarity? (There are many! But, the one that ismost indicative for me, is the blind belief in a school of thought.)
BTW, 2slugs, how are those multipliers working out for Ya?
Teabagers believe in the School of No Thought. They are proud of their ignorance, and that’s disturbing.
As to the multipliers, several private, independent macro forecasting firms have all come in with estimates that are pretty close to those predicted by Romer 15 months ago. The problem wasn’t with Romer’s math or theory, the problem was always with the size of the stimulus. Romer’s own numbers showed that the stimulus needed to be almost twice as large as the ~$710B that was eventually passed…note, part of the stimulus was an AMT extension and not new fiscal stimulus.
Really? Hmmm….I thought I was pretty clear in saying that I agreed with her post in which she asked why anyone would listen to Chicago School economists.
2slugs laughs at his “low? information?” voter while saying this: “Note the sign demanding jobs now, not big government.” So enamored of the the “Govt is the solution” school of thought, he can not understand the difference.
Where’s the low information? Lessee Y = C + I + G + NX equates to the corollary G = sum(all jobs). Did I get it right, 2slugs? :>)
Slugs, Janet Yellen is more evidence that the teabaggers are right when they charge that obama is out to destroy the economy. Remember Clinton taking inflation seriously. Adios to that. http://topnews.us/content/213156-janet-yellen-contender-fed-vice-chair Yellen believes in paying equal heed to fight unemployment and raise interest rates to battle inflation, which is quite contrary to hawks who are of the opinion that Fed’s first and foremost duty is to control price rise. At present the joblessness prevails in the whole market and interest rates are very low.
Hello inflation. Yellen appointed => invest in gold.
Murray Hill might be the perfect candidate for this political moment: young, bold, media-savvy, a Washington outsider eager to reshape the way things are done in the nation’s capital. And if these are cynical times, well, then, it’s safe to say Murray Hill is by far the most cynical. That’s because this little upstart is, in fact, a start-up. Murray Hill is actually Murray Hill Inc., a small, five-year-old Silver Spring public relations company that is seeking office to prove a point (and perhaps get a little attention). After the Supreme Court declared that corporations have the same rights as individuals when it comes to funding political campaigns, the self-described progressive firm took what it considers the next logical step: declaring for office. “Until now, corporate interests had to rely on campaign contributions and influence-peddling to achieve their goals in Washington,” the candidate, who was unavailable for an interview, said in a statement. “But thanks to an enlightened Supreme Court, now we can eliminate the middle-man and run for office ourselves.” William Klein, a “hired gun” who has been enlisted as Murray Hill’s campaign manager, said the firm appears to be the first “corporate person” to run for office and is promising a spirited campaign that “puts people second, or even third.” The corporate candidate already has its own Web site, a Facebook page with 2,600 fans and an online ad on YouTube that has drawn more than 172,000 hits.
You missed the idiocy of the sign. The teabaggers were protesting in St Louis in front of the hotel where Obama was giving a speech. The teabaggers were demanding that the govt do something about creating jobs, but then at the same time arguing for less govt. If you don’t understand why that’s an example of cognitive dissonance, then you’re hopeless.
And no, you did not get the equation right. You can’t do math, so it’s best not to try.
Janet Yellen’s nomination is good news. She is well qualified. And her husband is also a first rate academic economist. As to inflation, you need to learn how to balance risks. Right now the risk of deflation is a lot greater than the risk of inflation.
Historically gold has been a pretty bad hedge against inflation. If you’re worried about inflation, then go TIPS.
As to inflation, you need to learn how to balance risks. Right now the risk of deflation is a lot greater than the risk of inflation.
Not according to a recent study by the federal reserve:
The U.S. central bank has massively boosted the monetary base, which includes currency in circulation and bank deposits held at the Fed, in an effort to support markets during the most severe financial crisis since the Great Depression. “Inflation does not appear to be a risk in the current environment: the economy is in recession. Inflation is falling and is not expected to return before the recession ends,” according to an essay in the March/April edition of Review magazine, published by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. “If inflation resumes but the economy does not recover, policy-makers will face a difficult choice. Monitoring the size and composition of the monetary base will help us understand what actions are needed,” the study said
So Yellen is the wrong person at the worst possible time.
The U.S. central bank has massively boosted the monetary base, which includes currency in circulation and bank deposits held at the Fed, in an effort to support markets during the most severe financial crisis since the Great Depression. “Inflation does not appear to be a risk in the current environment: the economy is in recession. Inflation is falling and is not expected to return before the recession ends,” according to an essay in the March/April edition of Review magazine, published by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. “If inflation resumes but the economy does not recover, policy-makers will face a difficult choice. Monitoring the size and composition of the monetary base will help us understand what actions are needed,” the study said
Your reasons were inadequate. Linda is a lift wing parrot. I guess that counts as a high information voter from your perspective. Want a cracker? Will you share it with Linda?
Labeling people with terms you consider derogatory does not contribute to your credibility. Friedman’s Chicago School has done incredible damage to the world’s economy. That pretty much puts it in the category of “mostly fantasy.” This doesn’t mean that no useful research ever emerged from there, but in aftermath of the implementation of their policies has shredded their credibility.
2slugs, when the Govt is the only solution then such a sign and commentary seems ignorant, but when does growing Govt create jobs that are net + revenue? Next, I expect a set of studies that show each Govt job created has a multiplier for creating private sector jobs.
My math was wrong???!!!?? How? It was clearly the implication with your comments. G=all jobs? Maybe my multiplier is off, eh???
2slugs, when the belief is the Govt is the only solution then such a sign and commentary seems ignorant, but when does growing Govt jobs create jobs that are net + revenue? Y’ano that’s what the sign is about.
Next, I expect a set of studies that show each Govt job created has a multiplier for creating private sector jobs.
My math was wrong???!!!?? How? It was clearly the implication with your comments. G=all jobs? Maybe my multiplier is off, eh???
Labeling people with terms you consider derogatory does not contribute to your credibility. Nonesense. Derogatory comments take nothing away from comments on the issue.
Friedman’s Chicago School has done incredible damage to the world’s economy. That pretty much puts it in the category of “mostly fantasy.” It’s your comments that needs work. Here you are just repeating what you heard from other people like Linda in the echo chamber that don’t know what their talking about. I see you don’t support your claim. This not passes as argument coming from the left.
I trust Rusty’s experience so I don’t think he had to go ballistic on kharris. Because I argue from a free market perspective some lefties have said they I could not possibly have done simple cultural things like go to the symphony or museum. Some of these lefties are real screwballs — and kharris has his bad days.
On healthcare industry philosophers I did not know they industry had a need for them. Its certainly does not appear that they’re very competative. I would be interested if Rusty is one of these philosophers. Personally I do some moderatly sophisticated statistical analysis and model building for healthcare issues. It does not make me an expert or a big picture guy on the industry. And as far as trends in consulting go, the place where I work, I have no idea and have never heard of anybody that knows the direction for the industry. So It common to work in an industry and not have a big picture view of it. The only way you get this view is to be employed to produce one or be able to consume the work of analysts and consultants produce big picture views.
The last time the democrats did monetary policy was under Jimmy Carter. We all remember how they screwed up the economy creating massive inflation to goose employment. Jimmy’s economic policy working with his FED is the period where they drove the stake through the heart of Keynesian economics. Freshwater economics became accendent after their failure.
Now did the big banks, government supported mortgage providers, and others take chances knowing the government would come in and rescue them. Well if so then rational expectations is intact along with the Lucas critique. Has anyone exploited market inefficiency and made a killing? If not then the efficient market hypothesis is still working. The Keynesians failed while the Chicago school is going strong.
If Yellen is in anyway a thoughback to the Carter days then she needs to be filibustered. Maybe she’s a decoy.
The point of Y = C + I + G + NX is that it tells you the components of GDP, which also tells you the possible sources of aggregate demand. Increasing net exports (NX) would be nice and the Administration is counting on some growth there, but NX is a pretty small piece of GDP and weak aggregate demand is a worldwide problem, so you can’t count too much on NX. Private consumption demand is likely to be weak for a long time because people are trying to rewicker their household balances. Personal savings rates are way up. So scratch “C”. Private investment is also very weak and isn’t going to increase until one of two things happens. The first possibility is the classic conservative view that capital depreciates to the point where the private sector has to reinvest to replace worn out capital. I don’t think anyone wants to go that route. That means private investment demand must come from one of the other three components in some version of an accelerator model. But we already said that “C” is unlikely and “NX” is too small to drive a recovery. So that basically leaves “G” as the only way to stimulate aggregate demand. Only government spending can soak up private savings, and it is the excess of private savings that has driven the risk free real rate of interest below zero. But since businesses face a positive nominal rate, what this means is that the magnitude of the real interest rate faced by businesses is very high. Government spending props up consumer spending and increases private investment demand because the government buys goods and services from the private sector.
You’re equating government spending with government jobs is absurd. Countercyclical spending does not concentrate on increasing government jobs. Most government spending is in the form of the government buying from the private sector and drawing down private sector inventories. That government spending becomes a virtuous circle as businesses replenish inventories, increase payrolls to meet government demand, and spark consumer demand.
So yes, your math was wrong. You misidentified what the variable “G” means.
And there are plenty of real studies (as opposed to stupid teabagger talking points) that show govt spending increases aggregate demand, which increases realized GDP, which increases jobs.
Does anyone have any comments on the Lehman auditors report about their 501 account and the slight of hand that Lehman engaged in? It seems that Fuld may well go to jail for this either because he knew of wrong doing or should have known. It appears that this made it harder for Lehman to borrow on the repo market because they sold and rebought items. Also the report says that no one can figure out what a lot of Lehmans assets are really worth. Evidently they are to complex for the best minds to figure out.
Make that 105 I got the numbers confused. Its nice when you can put your own value on collateral. Lehman did this as well. As usual it takes a couple of years and then the real truth comes out. Just like it did in 1933 when the president of the NYSE got caught.
2slugs, you completely miss the point of the signs (three) because you can not understand how these folks do not believe, as you do, that Govt is the bestest solution.
These signs are protests against concentrating on the HC bill versus concentrating on improving the economy by increasing jobs. Ignoring the economy to win this bill, while demonizing industries, adding new taxes, deficit spending to excess, and adding a huge level of confusion over the future, causes consumers/voters into spending and saving patterns that clearly negatively impact C and I.
Increasing the size of (G)ovt (what the sign is talking about) does little to improve private sector job creation. The sign does not mention increasing Govt spending, your interpretation. That’s your projection, again.
Conveniently ignoring the point of adding Govt jobs not being a + revenue gain, is what these VOTERS understand. Moreover, they are very clear about their understanding of how the current spending has not improved the private sector jobs situation. These voters understand your version of Govt, “O’s” policies, has failed. More of these failed policies are not what they see as a solution. Imagine that!?
Angry Bear SMACKDOWN
Kharris has questioned my credibility directly, my integrity indirectly, and has questioned the credibility and integrity of this site. His facts are off, but the he/she and the Bears deserve a response anyway.
So, I am going to do two things:
1) Send Rdan a summary of some of my research, publication and seminar materials from the past five years or so, which I just happened to be putting together for another purpose. I won’t bore him with the 30 years before that.
2) Write a brief explanation below of my experience.
Then I will ask Rdan to review my credibility, and if he finds I lack credibility I want him to announce same to the entire blogosphere and i will slink away, banished. If any other Bears find that I have claimed credibility outside my field they may post that for the world to see, and I may slink away anyway.
So Kharris – smackdown.
I have not practiced solely or primarily as an accountant since 1977. I have never worked much with hospitals, only in terms of IDS or linkages to other providers.
I define nationally respected expertise as being asked to write, lecture, or analyze public policy for a major national health care organization or publication. Accordingly I fit that designation in:
physician group management
ambulatory surgery centers
nursing facilities, assisted living and seniors housing
I have experience but much less inpressive credentials in
imaging centers
physical therapy
urgent/immediate care centers
drug abuse components of mental health programs
general public health
disaster services
youth camp medical services
Rdan may note some of my recent expertise as 1) financial viability of physician groups 2) regulatory and management issues in nursing facilities 3) billing integrity, compliance and fraud issues 4) contracting issues and compliance 5) HIPAA 6) training 7) HR 8) financial modeling and many other issues.
Outside of health care, and much less obvious, I am known as an expert on business ethics, wage-and-hour compliance, operational auditing as a management tool and internal controls across a wide range of organizations, and of course rustbelt economic problems.
So Kharris, SMACKDOWN.
Rdan, if I do not fit my claims, please announce that I have been banished.
Rusty, don’t let KH get under your skin. He is just another serial, hit and run, angry commenter. I have seen him use his tactics on others sites, and have called him out for it here.
His MO has been to drop by, slip in a bomb, and then not respond to comments. He has recently appeared to return and respond with more angry commentary when confronted.
BTW, he does/did take offense at being called a woman. Even though he may act like he is PMS afflicted. But, that is not usually an ongoing daily affliction. Go figure?
So, Rusty, don’t let his kind of mindless, emotional commentary get to you. He’s not worth the energy.
i’d have said it another way. kharris has been unkind to me in comments. and sometimes i agree with him (her?). it’s all part of the blog experience. nothing to get upset about.
Just getting here tonight.
Well Rusty, I knew a lot of your background from our communications over the last several years. Why kharris took this tack is unknown. There is another commenter who has taken this approach somewhat with Linda in particular.
Commenters may differ with the particular approach or tone and certainly offer source and other material, but have no grounds to impugn qualifications and character. All Bears are well qualified, and in particular you are well qualified in experience for health care issues among others.
The only banishing might be for commenters who persist in this kind of attack. Such an ‘editorial policy’ is non-negotiable with me, since you asked. The policy we have is well defined and public A commenter can even dislike a post’s approach and say why….but do not attack the author.
What can I say to your request Rusty? You are an AB author who has full confidence from me in particular and other Bears.
CoRev has a point as well for this set of comments.
I Agree!
rusty:
Why do you care? Our Angry Bear want-a-be Mencken does this for effect. Just ignore it. He has done such to me also. Not worth getting upset about.
Don’t you dare try to equate me with Kharris. Linda is leftwing flamethrower with an attitude. As a linguistics lawyer from a state school without a significant background in economics she just does not have the intellectual horsepower to denounce the entire economics department at the University of Chicago. I would discuss the efficient market hypothesis with her but she does not understand what it is or care to learn about it.
Linda is faking it which would become apparent if she ever decides to try to defend one of her outrageous columns. Everything cactus was claiming broke down when you looked more closely at the economic history and read the papers of people like Christina Romer. It would happen faster with Linda.
By the way, how many emails have you received from me requesting preferential treatment. You made a mistake when you decided to respond to others that have contracted you. So maybe you should man-up and cut them off.
I understand that you want people to write columns that get people’s attention. This explains Bruce and Linda. But they do it with cheap tricks so you should not be suprised when they get some push back.
Cobery,
You are one of the ruder persons on the blog. You always have been.
I think of kharris as part of the AB family, and the blog wouldn’t be the same without him. The majority of his insights are spot on, and he calls out people that need to be called out, which I admire.
Cheap tricks?
Outside the Fox News psywar, inconvenient, to conning the public, numbers and facts are not cheap tricks.
Following the rule of “Countervailing Forces” we not have a “Coffee Party” to counteract the “Tea Party”. Of coourse the newest is partially funded by that huge anti-conservative George Soros.
Conservative action groups, expecially those in the climate change area, are constantly accused of being funded by “Big Energy.” I guess the conservative corollary is now that liberal political action groups are funded by George Soros.
One appears more true than the other. Care to guess?
Sammy,
Sometimes he rants and tilts at windmills. Maybe his wife decided to have a c-section and questioning this procedure set him off this time. I think rusty’s smackdown was overkill.
Cantab,
She also neither backs up or has anything intelligent to say about Ronald Coase, Robert Fogel,James Heckman, or Roger Myerson.
Well I do have nice things to say about Robert Fogel. A kind old man shuffling up to the lecture area reminding students that small times small equals smaller. Of course, Fogel’s brand of cliometrics wasn’t everyone’s cup of tea, but I always liked it. I’ve always had a hard time reconciling the boldness of “Time on the Cross” with the personal meekness of the author.
CoRev,
Soros provided money and that was all. The Tea Party founders got money from corporate donors and hired professional political organizers to stage events.
The Coffee Party stuff is more of an intellectual response and doesn’t have the passion behind it that the Tea Party movement has. Tea Party activists are enraged…to the point that they can’t even think straight. What the GOP did was to hire professionals to manipulate that raw anger. And as we learned from those RNC Powerpoint charts, they still view the Tea Party movement as something to be cynically manipulated. The problem with your analysis is that you confuse rage with a coherent political message. The old white farts that go to these Tea Party events are angry enough to become politically active and at the same time too angry to understand why they are angry. Anyone who holds up a sign that equates nazism with communism with Obama isn’t just telling us that he’s angry; he’s also telling us that he has no idea what any of those things actually mean except that all three signal a sense of alienation. Confused old women screaming at politicians about socialized medicine (as though British national health, Canadian single payer and Obama’s healthcare plan were all pretty much the same) and then demanding that the same politician keep his government hands off her Medicare….well, this is a person that is beyond rational. You can’t rationally argue someone out of a position that they didn’t rationally argue themselves into.
When the Founders worried about demogogues leading angry and unintelligent crowds, they had Dick Armey and the Tea Party movement in mind.
Cantab,
Ronald Coase really comes from the tradition that is known as the First Chicago School, which preceded what is today just called the Chicago School. The First Chicago School came out of the Frank Knight tradition. Gary Becker falls into this group. When people talk about the Chicago School today they usually have in mind the post-Friedman era that looked at macroeconomics as an exercise in finance and monetary policy. That’s one reason why so many of the Chicago School economists who are ranting about the stimulus package really came out of the field of finance.
And from this morning’s AP story on the Tea Party movement in NY, here’s a picture of some sorry looking teabaggers. Like I said. Old. White. Alienated. And poor penmanship. Also intellectually confused. Cutting the government’s budget is the best way that I know for that clueless woman to see her own household budget cut. I wonder what the total number of semester hours in macroeconomics you would find if you totaled up the educational history of every teabagger in this picture. My guess is zero.
Bonus picture of more hapless, white and old teabaggers. This time in St. Louis last Wednesday. Note the sign demanding jobs now, not big government. So if this teabagger wants a job now, why is he or she demanding that Obama do something about it? And even though I feel a bit sorry for this poor confused woman holding up the STOP GOVT GREED sign, you gotta chuckle at how she has managed to anthropomorphize a human failing and assigned it to a public institution. I think Anthony Downs would identify her as a “low information voter” in the original sense of the term…meaning someone who cannot understand abstract concepts and therefore has to convert problems into personal experiences and relationships. If you don’t understand Y = C + I + G + NX, then think of government as some greedy and rapacious person stealing your money.
ilsm,
You would think that if Linda wants to criticize the University of Chicago she would
first understand the arguments that were made and have some knowledge of the history of economic thought in this country. She also neither backs up or has anything intelligent to say about Ronald Coase, Robert Fogel,James Heckman, or Roger Myerson.
So where does she get her information? It seems from kook blogging sites since she certainly does not make reasoned arguments. So what you claim against conservatives is again projection of your own behavior
2slugs, you project your personal feelings too much on too many subjects.
Macroeconomics? Climate Science? What’s the scientific difference? What’s the scientific similarity? (There are many! But, the one that ismost indicative for me, is the blind belief in a school of thought.)
BTW, 2slugs, how are those multipliers working out for Ya?
Slugs,
I don’t see you really contradicting anything that I just said. Nor do I see you seconding Linda’s mastery of economic issues.
CoRev,
Teabagers believe in the School of No Thought. They are proud of their ignorance, and that’s disturbing.
As to the multipliers, several private, independent macro forecasting firms have all come in with estimates that are pretty close to those predicted by Romer 15 months ago. The problem wasn’t with Romer’s math or theory, the problem was always with the size of the stimulus. Romer’s own numbers showed that the stimulus needed to be almost twice as large as the ~$710B that was eventually passed…note, part of the stimulus was an AMT extension and not new fiscal stimulus.
Cantab,
Really? Hmmm….I thought I was pretty clear in saying that I agreed with her post in which she asked why anyone would listen to Chicago School economists.
This still balances
Y = (Ca – theft)+(Cb + theft-government overhead) + I + (G+theft+(government overhead-theft)) + NX
2slugs laughs at his “low? information?” voter while saying this: “Note the sign demanding jobs now, not big government.” So enamored of the the “Govt is the solution” school of thought, he can not understand the difference.
Where’s the low information? Lessee Y = C + I + G + NX equates to the corollary G = sum(all jobs). Did I get it right, 2slugs? :>)
Slugs,
Janet Yellen is more evidence that the teabaggers are right when they charge that obama is out to destroy the economy. Remember Clinton taking inflation seriously. Adios to that.
http://topnews.us/content/213156-janet-yellen-contender-fed-vice-chair
Yellen believes in paying equal heed to fight unemployment and raise interest rates to battle inflation, which is quite contrary to hawks who are of the opinion that Fed’s first and foremost duty is to control price rise. At present the joblessness prevails in the whole market and interest rates are very low.
Hello inflation. Yellen appointed => invest in gold.
Twas kharris over the top. Not Rusty.
Campaign stunt launches a corporate ‘candidate’ for Congress
Murray Hill might be the perfect candidate for this political moment: young, bold, media-savvy, a Washington outsider eager to reshape the way things are done in the nation’s capital. And if these are cynical times, well, then, it’s safe to say Murray Hill is by far the most cynical.
That’s because this little upstart is, in fact, a start-up. Murray Hill is actually Murray Hill Inc., a small, five-year-old Silver Spring public relations company that is seeking office to prove a point (and perhaps get a little attention).
After the Supreme Court declared that corporations have the same rights as individuals when it comes to funding political campaigns, the self-described progressive firm took what it considers the next logical step: declaring for office.
“Until now, corporate interests had to rely on campaign contributions and influence-peddling to achieve their goals in Washington,” the candidate, who was unavailable for an interview, said in a statement. “But thanks to an enlightened Supreme Court, now we can eliminate the middle-man and run for office ourselves.”
William Klein, a “hired gun” who has been enlisted as Murray Hill’s campaign manager, said the firm appears to be the first “corporate person” to run for office and is promising a spirited campaign that “puts people second, or even third.”
The corporate candidate already has its own Web site, a Facebook page with 2,600 fans and an online ad on YouTube that has drawn more than 172,000 hits.
CoRev,
You missed the idiocy of the sign. The teabaggers were protesting in St Louis in front of the hotel where Obama was giving a speech. The teabaggers were demanding that the govt do something about creating jobs, but then at the same time arguing for less govt. If you don’t understand why that’s an example of cognitive dissonance, then you’re hopeless.
And no, you did not get the equation right. You can’t do math, so it’s best not to try.
Cantab,
Janet Yellen’s nomination is good news. She is well qualified. And her husband is also a first rate academic economist. As to inflation, you need to learn how to balance risks. Right now the risk of deflation is a lot greater than the risk of inflation.
Historically gold has been a pretty bad hedge against inflation. If you’re worried about inflation, then go TIPS.
Slugs,
As to inflation, you need to learn how to balance risks. Right now the risk of deflation is a lot greater than the risk of inflation.
Not according to a recent study by the federal reserve:
The U.S. central bank has massively boosted the monetary base, which includes currency in circulation and bank deposits held at the Fed, in an effort to support markets during the most severe financial crisis since the Great Depression.
“Inflation does not appear to be a risk in the current environment: the economy is in recession. Inflation is falling and is not expected to return before the recession ends,” according to an essay in the March/April edition of Review magazine, published by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
“If inflation resumes but the economy does not recover, policy-makers will face a difficult choice. Monitoring the size and composition of the monetary base will help us understand what actions are needed,” the study said
So Yellen is the wrong person at the worst possible time.
The U.S. central bank has massively boosted the monetary base, which includes currency in circulation and bank deposits held at the Fed, in an effort to support markets during the most severe financial crisis since the Great Depression.
“Inflation does not appear to be a risk in the current environment: the economy is in recession. Inflation is falling and is not expected to return before the recession ends,” according to an essay in the March/April edition of Review magazine, published by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
“If inflation resumes but the economy does not recover, policy-makers will face a difficult choice. Monitoring the size and composition of the monetary base will help us understand what actions are needed,” the study said
Slugs,
Your reasons were inadequate. Linda is a lift wing parrot. I guess that counts as a high information voter from your perspective. Want a cracker? Will you share it with Linda?
Labeling people with terms you consider derogatory does not contribute to your credibility. Friedman’s Chicago School has done incredible damage to the world’s economy. That pretty much puts it in the category of “mostly fantasy.” This doesn’t mean that no useful research ever emerged from there, but in aftermath of the implementation of their policies has shredded their credibility.
2slugs, when the Govt is the only solution then such a sign and commentary seems ignorant, but when does growing Govt create jobs that are net + revenue? Next, I expect a set of studies that show each Govt job created has a multiplier for creating private sector jobs.
My math was wrong???!!!?? How? It was clearly the implication with your comments. G=all jobs? Maybe my multiplier is off, eh???
2slugs, when the belief is the Govt is the only solution then such a sign and commentary seems ignorant, but when does growing Govt jobs create jobs that are net + revenue? Y’ano that’s what the sign is about.
Next, I expect a set of studies that show each Govt job created has a multiplier for creating private sector jobs.
My math was wrong???!!!?? How? It was clearly the implication with your comments. G=all jobs? Maybe my multiplier is off, eh???
Zapster,
Labeling people with terms you consider derogatory does not contribute to your credibility.
Nonesense. Derogatory comments take nothing away from comments on the issue.
Friedman’s Chicago School has done incredible damage to the world’s economy. That pretty much puts it in the category of “mostly fantasy.”
It’s your comments that needs work. Here you are just repeating what you heard from other people like Linda in the echo chamber that don’t know what their talking about. I see you don’t support your claim. This not passes as argument coming from the left.
Sammy,
I trust Rusty’s experience so I don’t think he had to go ballistic on kharris. Because I argue from a free market perspective some lefties have said they I could not possibly have done simple cultural things like go to the symphony or museum. Some of these lefties are real screwballs — and kharris has his bad days.
On healthcare industry philosophers I did not know they industry had a need for them. Its certainly does not appear that they’re very competative. I would be interested if Rusty is one of these philosophers. Personally I do some moderatly sophisticated statistical analysis and model building for healthcare issues. It does not make me an expert or a big picture guy on the industry. And as far as trends in consulting go, the place where I work, I have no idea and have never heard of anybody that knows the direction for the industry. So It common to work in an industry and not have a big picture view of it. The only way you get this view is to be employed to produce one or be able to consume the work of analysts and consultants produce big picture views.
The last time the democrats did monetary policy was under Jimmy Carter. We all remember how they screwed up the economy creating massive inflation to goose employment. Jimmy’s economic policy working with his FED is the period where they drove the stake through the heart of Keynesian economics. Freshwater economics became accendent after their failure.
Now did the big banks, government supported mortgage providers, and others take chances knowing the government would come in and rescue them. Well if so then rational expectations is intact along with the Lucas critique. Has anyone exploited market inefficiency and made a killing? If not then the efficient market hypothesis is still working. The Keynesians failed while the Chicago school is going strong.
If Yellen is in anyway a thoughback to the Carter days then she needs to be filibustered. Maybe she’s a decoy.
CoRev,
The point of Y = C + I + G + NX is that it tells you the components of GDP, which also tells you the possible sources of aggregate demand. Increasing net exports (NX) would be nice and the Administration is counting on some growth there, but NX is a pretty small piece of GDP and weak aggregate demand is a worldwide problem, so you can’t count too much on NX. Private consumption demand is likely to be weak for a long time because people are trying to rewicker their household balances. Personal savings rates are way up. So scratch “C”. Private investment is also very weak and isn’t going to increase until one of two things happens. The first possibility is the classic conservative view that capital depreciates to the point where the private sector has to reinvest to replace worn out capital. I don’t think anyone wants to go that route. That means private investment demand must come from one of the other three components in some version of an accelerator model. But we already said that “C” is unlikely and “NX” is too small to drive a recovery. So that basically leaves “G” as the only way to stimulate aggregate demand. Only government spending can soak up private savings, and it is the excess of private savings that has driven the risk free real rate of interest below zero. But since businesses face a positive nominal rate, what this means is that the magnitude of the real interest rate faced by businesses is very high. Government spending props up consumer spending and increases private investment demand because the government buys goods and services from the private sector.
You’re equating government spending with government jobs is absurd. Countercyclical spending does not concentrate on increasing government jobs. Most government spending is in the form of the government buying from the private sector and drawing down private sector inventories. That government spending becomes a virtuous circle as businesses replenish inventories, increase payrolls to meet government demand, and spark consumer demand.
So yes, your math was wrong. You misidentified what the variable “G” means.
And there are plenty of real studies (as opposed to stupid teabagger talking points) that show govt spending increases aggregate demand, which increases realized GDP, which increases jobs.
Does anyone have any comments on the Lehman auditors report about their 501 account and the slight of hand that Lehman engaged in? It seems that Fuld may well go to jail for this either because he knew of wrong doing or should have known. It appears that this made it harder for Lehman to borrow on the repo market because they sold and rebought items. Also the report says that no one can figure out what a lot of Lehmans assets are really worth. Evidently they are to complex for the best minds to figure out.
Make that 105 I got the numbers confused. Its nice when you can put your own value on collateral. Lehman did this as well. As usual it takes a couple of years and then the real truth comes out. Just like it did in 1933 when the president of the NYSE got caught.
2slugs, you completely miss the point of the signs (three) because you can not understand how these folks do not believe, as you do, that Govt is the bestest solution.
These signs are protests against concentrating on the HC bill versus concentrating on improving the economy by increasing jobs. Ignoring the economy to win this bill, while demonizing industries, adding new taxes, deficit spending to excess, and adding a huge level of confusion over the future, causes consumers/voters into spending and saving patterns that clearly negatively impact C and I.
Increasing the size of (G)ovt (what the sign is talking about) does little to improve private sector job creation. The sign does not mention increasing Govt spending, your interpretation. That’s your projection, again.
Conveniently ignoring the point of adding Govt jobs not being a + revenue gain, is what these VOTERS understand. Moreover, they are very clear about their understanding of how the current spending has not improved the private sector jobs situation. These voters understand your version of Govt, “O’s” policies, has failed. More of these failed policies are not what they see as a solution. Imagine that!?