Economics Current Info - If you're not interested just pass it by!

[Organics North]

Quote:
I disagree. I'll use Mahonri's recent poll as a reference. We do not have an 80% center. We have about equal Liberal, Conservative, and Libertarian factions with about the same number of Centrists if you consider the ones "on the lines" with the Centrists. I think the idea that most are in the center is a myth, one I believed for long time. I don't know the margin of error in this poll but I don't think it is off by a whole lot. An election victory of 52%-48% is considered a solid win.

https://www.backyardchickens.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=416924

As to my theory on why they all seem the same once they get to Washington. When a new legislator gets to Washington, they get a tremendous education. People tell them what is actually going on. They are usually pretty intelligent people (I know there are some real exceptions) and they are usually people that really do care about the country. Yeah, I know each and every one has a tremendous ego otherwise they would not have the confidence to run. And they are pretty much ruthless enough to say what it takes to get elected and do what they feel is necessary once they are in office. I'm not convinced ruthless is a bad trait for the position. But I think when they actually find there is substance in the issues and what is really involved, they rethink what they are going to do. I'll use Foreign Aid again as an example. It makes a nice sound bite to say you will cut Foreign Aid. But when you look at a specific one, you find out that cutting that one will cost X number of American jobs or maybe risk our supply of a strategic material. If you try to explain that to the American people, they won't listen because it takes more than a few words to explain. And your opponents in the next election will pick up a few sound bites to use against you. It is my theory that once they understand the actual consequences of their vote, it is a lot harder to stand firm on principle.

You make a joke about being scared of someone doing what he says. If someone is elected on sound bites instead of a real understanding of the consequences of the issues, that is scary.

When I say "unite the center 80%" I am not implying 80% are in the middle, if a middle exists. Political and sociological beliefs are multi dimensional. However I do believe that 80% of the population can come together under the right circumstances. The other 20% are the extremes that won't be changed, both on the left and right. Of course this is a general thought meant for an internet forum.

On your analysis of what happens when the politicians get to Washington I agree with you and enjoyed reading your thoughts. It goes back to every action having consequences. I do wonder about some of the bigger issues, like what really happened on 9/11 and the real reasons we are in Afghanistan and Iraq. Oh to be a fly on the wall for only a day...

I wasn't the one to joke about someone doing what they say however if politicians don't fulfill campaign promises then American politics will always be the frustrating dumb down BS they are today.

I have Jack Nicholson in my head screaming "You can't handle the truth!".

Ridgerunner has made a compelling argument... However your rewording PC makes sense to me too..

Yes with the right leader I do belive 80% would come together..
(Ridgerunner, I do really like what you say about the "education" they get once in Washington.. Yes some bright, well intended folks are elected... But WASHINGTON does something to a person us outsiders can not really comprehend..

Not to digress, but in a past life I was involved with the movers and shakers that made laws and set standards regarding Mammography.. It was very interesting to say the least, how one influences those that write laws that effect everything down stream! Nothing bad, simple conversations over dinner and a bunch of bottles of very good wine.. Simply winning the hearts of other peoples opinion, not unlike what we do here with each other... (Wow flash back! To hanging out in DC with those folks.. I forgot I used to do that.. ME the simple, woodworking, chicken and lettuce farmer...

)

Be well
ON

 

[FarmerJamie]

Quote:
Now publishing his/her SimCity score (with screenshots) should be part of a candidate's bio when running for office....that I can support

No hiding from I balanced the budget with no taxes (but everyone died) or "a chicken in every pot" (but the employers and high-income earners all fled).

the answer is somewhere in between....

Actually, my typical SimCity strategy is - wait for it - cut taxes across the board and spend as little as possible.

It takes longer, but in the end I get a smooth-running metropolis. Dirty industry stays on the OTHER side of a BIG forest, though.

Yep, the industry does have to go somewhere.

Haven't played in years - I remember playing a version that came on a 3.5" diskette that was current technology.

After the pollution and urban spawl took hold, I sent in the earthquakes and "movie monster rampage". Never could quite simulate all those nifty theories we reviewed in Public Planning Policy and Urban Land Use classes....

 

[I have WHAT in my yard?]

Each article contains its own reference site ----

http://www.drives.co.uk/fullstory.asp?id=3040

Japanese motor manufacturers are scrambling for motor technologies that do not need rare earth metals, following a crisis in which China, which produces 95–97% of the world’s rare earths, cut off supplies to Japan and limited supplies to other countries. The materials (shown below) – which include neodymium, dysprosium and yttrium – are needed for a wide range of applications, from electric vehicles and wind turbines, to computer hard drives and mobile phones.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/nov/16/ireland-bailout-government-says-no-need-to-panic

Ireland crisis could cause EU collapse, warns president
Herman Van Rompuy, president of the EU, has warned it faces a 'survival crisis', with the risk of contagion spreading from Ireland across the continent


http://www.scpr.org/programs/patt-morrison/2010/11/16/food-insecurity/

About 15% of U.S. households, 17.4 million families, lacked enough money to feed themselves at one point last year; in California just over 14% of households suffered from “food insecurity” at one point during 2009. In the richest country in the world this large of a number of households that are wanting for food is never acceptable, but the problem is stabilizing somewhat as the economy limps toward a recovery—but there are bigger issues in the immediate future, most of them based on the funding of government programs, from food stamps to Medicare, that act as a vital safety net for the poorest and hungriest Americans.


California Will Default On Its Debt, Says Chris Whalen
http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticke...nx,tlt,tbt&sec=topStories&pos=1&asset=&ccode=

Municipal bonds have plummeted in recent days, as investors have suddenly focused on huge state and city budget deficits that there's no easy way to fix.
Nowhere has this collapse been more visible than California, which faces a massive $25 billion shortfall and red ink for as far as the eye can see.
After years in which every looming financial crisis has been met with a government bailout, you might think that the same solution awaits California, as well as all the other states that have huge obligations that they can't afford to meet.
But this time that may not happen, says Chris Whalen, a financial industry analyst and Managing Director of Institutional Risk Analytics.
In fact, Whalen thinks that California will default on its debt--hammering all the pension funds and other investors who have loaded up on apparently safe state bonds.

http://arabnews.com/economy/article193098.ece
China plans price controls to tackle food inflation
By REUTERS
Published: Nov 16, 2010 23:11 Updated: Nov 16, 2010 23:11
BEIJING: China will unveil food price controls and crack down on speculation in agricultural commodities to contain inflationary pressure that its central bank governor highlighted as a risk on Tuesday.
With consumer prices rising at their fastest pace in more than two years, the National Development and Reform Commission, the country’s top planning agency, is preparing a “one-two punch” of actions to rein in food costs, official media reported.
Such direct intervention would mark an escalation of the government’s efforts to tame inflation and underline its worries over the rapid run-up in food prices.
Possible steps include price controls, subsidies for shoppers, a crackdown on hoarding and price gouging as well as a system whereby mayors are made responsible for a basket of food items, the China Securities Journal reported.
Those found speculating on corn or cotton will also be punished severely, it added.
“Price increases, particularly overly rapid food price increases, are the main economic problem faced by the country at present,” the report cited an unnamed source as saying.



In addition to CHina starting to flex its muscle both at home and abroad, we are seeing a compelling list of factors coinciding: states still struggling with massive budget deficits due to losses in the crash compounded by lowered tax revenue, a struggling EU which could really reek havoc here, inflation here and the impact of compounding energy issues. BYC members may be more resilient than most, but as energy of all sorts becomes more expensive this will add a crunch to the smash.

 

[Ridgerunner]

In Arkansas, we have a state constitutional requirement to balance the budget. This may come as a shock to some people, but poor Arkansas, one of the poorer states, has a balanced budget. In these hard economic times, we will probably take another half a percent off the sales tax on food. It used to be 6%, is now at 2%, and should drop another half percent in the next legislative session. Arkansas probably got short-changed in the federal bail-out/incentive efforts of the last couple of years because we were not in as bad a shape as some states. I'm not saying it did not hurt here too. It did, but it could have been worse. Those efforts were supposedly aimed at the states in the worse trouble.

In the recent elections, our Governor was reelected by an overwhelming majority, the only Democrat statewide officer elected or reelected. He tends to under-promise and over-achieve. A really strange politician.

 

[Dunkopf]

I heard one of those deficit commission lead guys, Simpson on NPR today.Sounds like they're pretty determined to get rid of deductions and cut social security and medicare. No extra taxes for the rich of course. Tougher times coming. No talk about cuts in defense spending yet. Guess they got some more wars on the planning table.

Royd
I think the few Tea Party people that got in, will probably try to reduce some spending. They are too few though. The pubs got the message this cycle. Unfortunately all the cuts will be in places that will severely cripple the middle class. They won't actually reduce government. They will just reduce the amount of money being spent. The war will continue, jobs will continue going overseas and people will continue to get paid less if they have a job. More people will be standing on corners and the stretch limos will get bigger.

 

[joebryant]

Quote:
You got that right! I would say LOL, but it ain't funny.

 

[Organics North]

Quote:
Did Beebe not consider a run for presidency?.. But like most genuinely good people decide against it? (Like Powell)


Dunkopf, joebryant,
Yes the limo's will get bigger and the bullet proofing will get thicker... We might even see the day in our lifetimes where the corporate elite drive around with a private military escort... Just like they do in other 3rd world countries.

ON

 

[joebryant]

Quote:
Did Beebe not consider a run for presidency?.. But like most genuinely good people decide against it? (Like Powell)


Dunkopf, joebryant,
Yes the limo's will get bigger and the bullet proofing will get thicker... We might even see the day in our lifetimes where the corporate elite drive around with a private military escort... Just like they do in other 3rd world countries.

ON

We'sa gettin' thar!

 

[Organics North]

Prison costs:
As of 2005, there are 2 million people locked up in federal, state, and county facilities, that's up more than 600% since the 1970s. More than 6 million people are under state supervision in the form of parole or probation. The United States incarcerates more people than any other country in the world.

Black men are 6% of the U.S. population but over 40% of our prison population.

Every day in the United States 200 new jail cells are constructed.

Inequalities
Most prisoners come from disadvantaged backgrounds. Most have not completed high school. Many can barely read. Roughly one-third were been unemployed before imprisonment. Another third had annual incomes of less than $5,000.Children of incarcerated parents have increased risk of anxiety, depression, aggression, truancy, attention disorders and poor scholastic performance.

Black people are 7.8 times more likely to be imprisoned than whites, when convicted of the same crime.

Costs
Prisons cost taxpayers more than $32 billion a year. Every year that an inmate spends in prison costs $22,000. An individual sentenced to five years for a $300 theft costs the public more than $100,000. The cost of a life term averages $1.5 million.

States are spending more money on prisons than education. Over the course of the last 20 years, the amount of money spent on prisons was increased by 570% while that spent on elementary and secondary education was increased by only 33%.


So this trend continues.... Underspend on education and cut the social safety net.... Yet it is OK, spend $22K a year to lock people up. ??

I personally feel the trend of all other first world countries but the USA makes more sense... Reducing Prison costs/inmates, and taking that money and spending it on social reform and jobs so people stay out of trouble. I know it works.... I have been in seedy neighborhoods with a $1000 cash in my pocket and felt safe in Helsinki... You could walk around with a $100 taped on your head and be safe... Virtually no crime.

(Why... OK I will tell the story... You see this Russian friend in the USA needed to get money back to his family in Russia.. He knew I was going to Helsinki, So gave me the cash and the contact.. So I met up with a room full of questionable looking Russians in a seedy hotel in Helsinki to give the money. I must say quite the experience.. Yes, Finland has a problem with illegal immigrants as we do. Their illegals are Russian for the most part. Remember this was back in the late 80's early 90's)

Here is an interesting read on Euro prison philosophy.
http://unlockingamerica.blogspot.com/2008/08/finland.html

OR
I still contend Royd's approach would work.........However, We will need to do away with the high cost of the Judicial system and take matters into our own hands... Of course it will be much cheaper to serve justice with a rope or a bullet...... Just like it used to be in the American Wild West. (I could live with that personally I am a good shot and well armed.)

ON

 

[Ridgerunner]

Did Beebe not consider a run for presidency?.. But like most genuinely good people decide against it? (Like Powell)

I'm not sure Beebe would be that popular with most of the people on this thread. He was elected with a Constitutional requirement to balance the budget already in place. That means he was not in a hole moneywise when he was elected. He did not have to fix things. Partly because we are such a poor state to start with and partly because we were not as exposed as some other states, we did not fall as far as many other states. He is not a firebrand. He does not have a specific cause where he leads the charge, all or nothing. He obviously sees the State sales tax on food as a bad thing and is working to eliminate it, but he is not trying to eliminate it all at once. Two percent here, a half a percent there, and it goes down without busting the budget. He selects his causes carefully. He still has not taken a position on the state lottery that was passed two years ago. He came up through the political system and is very good working the system. That means he can more than hold his own in the back rooms and is very good at compromising to get what he wants. Many people frown at that as shady backroom politics, but he doe not announce something until it is a done deal or is clearly doable. He does get things done once he gets involved but he is very careful about where he gets involved. As president, he would not have that luxury. Underpromise and overacheive is not how you get elected or reelected to the presidency. He does not inspire people as much as make them comfortable. As president, I think we need somebody that can inspire the people. Otherwise the people will not be willing to make the sacrifice straightening things out will take.

Since this seems to be a philosophy and idea thread, let me put out a model of how I think representative democracy works. This is a simplistic example and you can knitpick it to death of you want to, but I'm trying to demonstrate a point. As a representative democracy, I'll use a model of a city council with five elected members, each representing distinct districts. A voter goes to their representative and describes a pothole that needs to be fixed. The representative does some investigation and says, yep, that one is pretty bad. That representative cannot fix that pothole by himself. The city has to pay for it and that requires that a majority of the council vote to appropriate funds. That requires the representative to convince at least two of the other representatives that the pothole not in their district needs to be fixed. That way, when it comes up for a vote, the measure will have a majority.

The representative is not going to craft a proposal alone. Private meetings will be held to determine what it will take to fix that pothole. These private meetings are probably in violation of the sunshine laws in some jurisdictions. A proposal is hammered out where at least three representatives get enough for them to vote on the proposal. Maybe it is a pothole fixed in their district. Maybe it is a new swing set at a playground. Maybe it is a promise of political support when they run for mayor. What the cost is determines if it is "good government" or bad, but the cost of fixing that pothole is not what it costs to fix that pothole. It is the cost of what it takes to fix that pothole plus whatever else it takes to get the votes to fix the pothole. It may be a simple three-pothole bill or it may be a comprehensive, let's fix the potholes city-wide plan. Even with a citywide plan, you have to decide if you spend equal money in each district, if you spend money proportional to tax money paid, do you determine which are the worst and fix those first, or do you prioritize based on which streets get the most traffic. In a representative democracy, or a straight democracy for that matter, it is going to be difficult to get one pothole fixed unless that one pothole affects a whole lot of people.