Monday, October 11, 2010
Friday, October 8, 2010
"WTF C.C.?" (No, not C.C. Sabathia, the bigger C.C.)
Short-sighted, misguided, and downright insanely ludicrous. There are no ways to even give Gov. Chris Christie the benefit of the doubt on finding other alternatives to the THE Tunnel. Though he seems like he would be a nice guy in person, the reality is he represents the 'Old' New Jersey, where the automobile was king, rather than the 'New' New Jersey that has to deal with scarce parking, high gas prices (even with the lowest gasoline tax in the country), and pothole infested roads that you don’t have to worry about while you’re listening to your iPod and reading your Kindle while riding NJ Transit.
Paul Krugman takes a more political and economic perspective but still explains it pretty straightforwardly in his column today, where he says:
“So, about that tunnel: with almost 1,200 people per square mile, New Jersey is the most densely populated state in America, more densely populated than any major European nation. {emphasis mine} Add in the fact that many residents work in New York, and you have a state that can’t function without adequate public transportation. There just isn’t enough space for everyone to drive to work.”
Paul Krugman takes a more political and economic perspective but still explains it pretty straightforwardly in his column today, where he says:
“So, about that tunnel: with almost 1,200 people per square mile, New Jersey is the most densely populated state in America, more densely populated than any major European nation. {emphasis mine} Add in the fact that many residents work in New York, and you have a state that can’t function without adequate public transportation. There just isn’t enough space for everyone to drive to work.”
"Okay big boss man; time to put your money where your mouth is..."
I have to say that I really, really like this idea from William D. Cohan, author of "House of Cards". He suggests that Wall Street worked well for everyone in the past mainly because in the days of partnerships, firm management had a personal stake in the profits and losses of the overall firm. About how the industry works today, he writes:
"Over the past generation, this business model has worked well for one group in particular: the bankers, traders and honchos who work on Wall Street. These days on Wall Street, around 50 percent of every dollar of revenue generated is paid out to its employees in the form of compensation. What other business on earth does this? None."
What gets lost in this last statement is that while $0.50 of every $1.00 of revenue is spent on compensation, I wonder what how many cents on that $0.50 goes to the rank-and-file staff that make their firms run day-to-day in thankless jobs? I'd say no more than $0.02 of $0.50 go to the people that give up much of their own personal lives only to be overlooked in good times and be the first ones booted out in bad times.
"Over the past generation, this business model has worked well for one group in particular: the bankers, traders and honchos who work on Wall Street. These days on Wall Street, around 50 percent of every dollar of revenue generated is paid out to its employees in the form of compensation. What other business on earth does this? None."
What gets lost in this last statement is that while $0.50 of every $1.00 of revenue is spent on compensation, I wonder what how many cents on that $0.50 goes to the rank-and-file staff that make their firms run day-to-day in thankless jobs? I'd say no more than $0.02 of $0.50 go to the people that give up much of their own personal lives only to be overlooked in good times and be the first ones booted out in bad times.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Pearlstein and Miller This Week
As I stated in a recent blog post, Steven Pearlstein and Matt Miller of The Washington Post are becoming my regular weekly must-read columns. Here are some excerpts:
From Matt Miller’s column today:
“The mother of all inconvenient truths is this: Global capitalism's ability to lift hundreds of millions of people out of poverty in China, India and other developing countries comes partly at the expense of tens of millions of workers in wealthy nations. This awful, inexorable fact will soon pose an enormous moral and intellectual challenge for the American left.”
From Steven Pearlstein’s column yesterday:
“If you asked Americans how much of the nation's pretax income goes to the top 10 percent of households, it is unlikely they would come anywhere close to 50 percent, which is where it was just before the bubble burst in 2007… From World War II until 1976, considered by many as the "golden years" for the U.S. economy, the top 10 percent of the population took home less than a third of the income generated by the private economy.”
Please enjoy both reads and let me know what you think.
From Matt Miller’s column today:
“The mother of all inconvenient truths is this: Global capitalism's ability to lift hundreds of millions of people out of poverty in China, India and other developing countries comes partly at the expense of tens of millions of workers in wealthy nations. This awful, inexorable fact will soon pose an enormous moral and intellectual challenge for the American left.”
From Steven Pearlstein’s column yesterday:
“If you asked Americans how much of the nation's pretax income goes to the top 10 percent of households, it is unlikely they would come anywhere close to 50 percent, which is where it was just before the bubble burst in 2007… From World War II until 1976, considered by many as the "golden years" for the U.S. economy, the top 10 percent of the population took home less than a third of the income generated by the private economy.”
Please enjoy both reads and let me know what you think.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
“India and China, China and India; Elaine and Susie, Susie and Elaine”
(In case you didn’t get the Seinfeld reference.)
A couple of articles about India and China recently, related to population growth, economic growth, and issues related to economic growth. A few passages that stand out:
“The Indian government recognises the need to tackle the infrastructure crisis, and is getting better at persuading private firms to stump up the capital. But the process is slow and infected with corruption. It is hard to measure these things, but many observers think China has done a better job than India of curbing corruption, with its usual brutal methods, such as shooting people.” {emphasis mine}
“Many universities turn out graduates who are good at exams but unaccustomed to thinking about real-world problems.”
I have many personal anecdotes that corroborate this 2nd statement but will not make them here openly. I have a feeling that the people that will be offended by this statement are exactly the people I’m thinking about.
A couple of articles about India and China recently, related to population growth, economic growth, and issues related to economic growth. A few passages that stand out:
“The Indian government recognises the need to tackle the infrastructure crisis, and is getting better at persuading private firms to stump up the capital. But the process is slow and infected with corruption. It is hard to measure these things, but many observers think China has done a better job than India of curbing corruption, with its usual brutal methods, such as shooting people.” {emphasis mine}
“Many universities turn out graduates who are good at exams but unaccustomed to thinking about real-world problems.”
I have many personal anecdotes that corroborate this 2nd statement but will not make them here openly. I have a feeling that the people that will be offended by this statement are exactly the people I’m thinking about.
"If you build it, they will come."
A number of Republican Gubernatorial candidates claim to be opposed to construction of high-speed rail networks in their states. The reality is it’s going to get built anyway and these candidates are simply using it as an election issue to show their opposition to President Obama than any actual opposition to building high-speed rail. To understand why the lines will get built, look no further than:
1) The money set aside in the stimulus is strictly for high-speed rail construction and if it’s not used for that purpose it must be returned to the federal government.
2) The article cites many Republicans supporting high-speed rail construction projects, such as Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-CA), Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood (R-IL), and former Medirian, MS mayor and Reconnecting America President John Robert Smith (R-MS).
3) Alaska’s At-Large Member of the House, Don Young (R-AK) wrote an op-ed piece that I blogged about on the need for high-speed rail.
So long story short, this is just election posturing and nothing more. And sadly, Democrats voting against these candidates will call them hypocrites while the Republicans voting for these candidates will forget they ever opposed the projects in the first place. Hopefully the country will not lose out from all of this superficial bickering.
1) The money set aside in the stimulus is strictly for high-speed rail construction and if it’s not used for that purpose it must be returned to the federal government.
2) The article cites many Republicans supporting high-speed rail construction projects, such as Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-CA), Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood (R-IL), and former Medirian, MS mayor and Reconnecting America President John Robert Smith (R-MS).
3) Alaska’s At-Large Member of the House, Don Young (R-AK) wrote an op-ed piece that I blogged about on the need for high-speed rail.
So long story short, this is just election posturing and nothing more. And sadly, Democrats voting against these candidates will call them hypocrites while the Republicans voting for these candidates will forget they ever opposed the projects in the first place. Hopefully the country will not lose out from all of this superficial bickering.
Is this the Military-Industrial Complex Ike warned us about 50 years ago?
A blog post at The Economist offers a counterpoint to a Wall Street Journal op-ed piece authored by AEI's Arthur Brooks, Heritage's Ed Feulner, and the Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol. One key point that jumped out at me was:
"The reality is that much of the world is free-riding off the security provided by American military dominance. Were American taxpayers to refuse to bear so much of the burden of keeping the world safe for Danish container ships, other countries would surely step up. Furthermore, considerations of basic distributive fairness suggest they should."
The blog posting also cites another great column at The Washington Post by Linda J. Bilmes and Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph E. Stiglitz, which breaks down the actual direct and indirect costs of the Iraq War.
"The reality is that much of the world is free-riding off the security provided by American military dominance. Were American taxpayers to refuse to bear so much of the burden of keeping the world safe for Danish container ships, other countries would surely step up. Furthermore, considerations of basic distributive fairness suggest they should."
The blog posting also cites another great column at The Washington Post by Linda J. Bilmes and Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph E. Stiglitz, which breaks down the actual direct and indirect costs of the Iraq War.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)