Where a Picture is Worth a Thousand Words

I like this picture:

National Job Approval" Barach Obama December 8, 2009

Partly because it’s showing the shine is wearing off and America is starting to understand what many of us saw at the outset.  But also because this is a “poll of polls”.  Go to the site and see for yourself.  Each dot in the graph shows the results of an independent poll.  USToday, CNN, Gallup and so on.  And, in short, the survey SAYS!

NoBama.

Poor Form

I get why people hate politics and politicians.  Heck, I hate politics and politicians.  We should be able to get to the point where we can disagree and yet still have the class to let someone go to the restroom:

After 75 minutes and 14 split votes Monday, Tony Gurley and the GOP regained the top spot on the Wake County Board of Commissioners – on a tie-breaker achieved only when member Betty Lou Ward took an unexcused bathroom break.

See, the Wake County Board is made up of 7 members.  Right now the Democrats have control of the Board 4-3.  One of the members, a Democrat suffered a stroke and has been unable to attend meetings; that makes it 3-3.  Last night the board was electing a new chairman and after 75 minutes and multiple votes, could get past the 3-3 tie.  That’s when Ms. Ward went to the bathroom.  Because she didn’t officially request an absence, the Board was within it’s right to vote without her, and they did.

Legal?  Yes.  Without class?  Absolutely.

The World Compared to the States

Ben Hoffman is having another monster conversation describing Common Right-Wing Lies.  Ben’s post begins by talking about what he considers lies:

  1. right-wingers claim Obama promised that unemployment would not go above 8 percent if the stimulus was passed. Eric Cantor claimed: “We were promised. The president said we would keep unemployment under 8.5 percent (if the stimulus passed).”
  2. Lie: Reagan’s tax cuts resulted in increased revenues.
  3. Lie: Obama’s spending has resulted in a huge budget deficit.

And then he refutes that by claiming the “Fact”:

  1. The Job Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan report included a graph that projected unemployment rates without the stimulus would peak at 9% and with the stimulus at just under 8%. That is not a promise; it is a projection, an estimate, a prediction. Claiming it was a promise is crazy talk.
  2. Reagan’s tax cuts resulted in decreased revenues. His tax increases resulted in increased revenues.
  3. Obama is responsible for only a small sliver of the deficit.

Now, there is a whole board full of comments on the subject; stop over for the debate.

However, during that debate, we began to take on the role of Government and really what it means when the Government creates public programs; Libraries, Parks, Beaches, Zoos and Police/Fire Stations.  I contend that when the government uses public money to establish and run these organizations, it is the equivalent of robbing one neighbor at gun point only to take that money and give it to your other neighbor in the form of a library, museum or zoo.

Of course this is a Libertarian point of view.  And maybe taken to its extreme, is a bit untenable.  But I do maintain that if a government is going to set up public works programs, it should be as local to the people as possible.  There is very little argument that can be made that would support taking money from citizens in North Carolina to support a Federal program giving money to an Art District in California.

Anyway, during the debate, one of us, Arbourist, made a comment stating that Socialist States are alive and well in the world:

Of course not, libertarianism has not ever been implemented, nor will it ever be implemented. It is not a practical way to run a society, unlike socialism which has many practical applications, and is doing great in many locations:Cuba, Venezuela, Nigeria, Canada, Sweden, Norway, […].

This got me to thinking.  So, I went out and grabbed some data here and here.  Put it down and paper and came up with this:

GDP per Capita

This is a graph showing the GDP per Capita of the World’s richest 50-60-70 nations, some interesting nations not in that group and then the list of nations quoted by Arbourist.  Further, I have compared these nations to the States of the United States of America, just to see where they rank.

Check out some interesting notes:

  1. The top 4 nations all are financial destination countries.  Their rankings might be skewed as such.
  2. Of the nations mention by the Arbourist, only 1, Norway, ranks ahead of the United States.  The 5 remaining rank below the United States.
  3. Of the 5 that rank behind the USA, two rank ahead of the European Union.
  4. While Norway ranks ahead of the USA in total, if Norway became a State, it would only be the 5th richest in our Nation.
  5. If Canada and Sweden were to become States, they would be the 40th and 43rd richest States respectively.
  6. And finally, if Venezuela, Cuba and Nigeria were to become States, they would immediately be the poorest States in the Country; their combined GDP per Capita not even equaling that of Mississippi–currently the poorest State in the Nation.

No, the fact remains.  The United States of America is the single richest Nation ever in the history of the world.  And we are so rich because we try to maximize the free market and the flow of capital and the driving motivation of profits.  The freer the market, the better off her citizens.

Free Market Guy

So, word is that I trust the free market to a fault.  It might be hard to dispute that, but then again, my limited knowledge of economics as a science could argue in my favor that what I do or don’t know doesn’t mean squat.  Hell, for all I know, the only reason that I feel the way I do is that when I was a kid I mighta thought my dad was a Republican.  [he wasn’t, democrat blue through and through].  Anyway, so I started thinking.  They have books on sports.  Everything from who wins and loses, point spread, over under and even crazy things, like TDs in a game, fumbles in the first half or yards rushing per carry.  Crazy crazy stuff.  More crazy is how accurate it is.

See, it’s one thing to SAY that the Vikings are gonna beat Green Bay.  It’s another thing entirely to BET money that they will.  One is a hope.  The other is, or can be, an investment.

So I went out to see if there was a market for the stuff that I talk about here.  Turns out; there is:  Intrade

Intrade is a clearing house for all kinds of strange things.  You can bet on whoo will have control of the House of Representatives after 2010 election.  You can bet on Cap and Trade regulations, Gov Sanford staying in office and–well, Health Care plans.  Let’s check it out.

And as of right now, this board is tracking three “markets”

  1. A federal government-run health insurance plan to be approved before midnight ET 31 Dec 2009
  2. A federal government-run health insurance plan to be approved before midnight ET 31 March 2010
  3. A federal government-run health insurance plan to be approved before midnight ET 30 June 2010

Now, the way it works is that the “Closing Price” is what the “market” feels is the % chance that a “thing” will occur.  So, if the closing price for the “Vikings winning the NFC Norris” is at 83.5, then that is saying the market feels there is an 83.5% chance of the Vikings winning the Division.

Check out the graphs for each of our Health Care scenarios:


Price for Will a federal government run health insurance plan (a public option) be approved in the US? at intrade.com

This one looks very promising.  With a closing price of 2.7, the market is saying that there is only a 2.7% chance that we’ll see a “Public Option” by December 31, 2009.  How about March 31, 2010?

Note:  These graphs are show with their real time rates.  At the time of prining the first was at 2.7 and the bottom two at 12.0.


Price for Will a federal government run health insurance plan (a public option) be approved in the US? at intrade.com

Ouch, that one doesn’t look so good.  Fully 400% increase to 12% that we’ll see the public option by March 31, 2010.  For our last time frame; June 30, 2010?


Price for Will a federal government run health insurance plan (a public option) be approved in the US? at intrade.com

Fascinating.  The exact same closing price; 12.  The market feels that there is a 12% chance that we’ll have a “Public Option” passed by June 30th, 2010.

Very interesting stuff.  One note, this data is saying that if we don’t pass this by April 1, there is a zero percent chance that we’ll pass it by July 1.  If the market felt that there was a chance of passing after March 31, the close would reflect a number HIGHER than the March 31 closing.

The Fruits of Our Labor

Quick.  Below, which company would you want to own?

52 Week View Range: $0.06 - $5.10

This is one Company.  See the second one below.

52 Week View Range: $1.50 - $9.14

Is it even close?  One company is taking off.  Not hard to do, the market has come back by some 60%.  However the other company, even in one of the best markets we have seen in years, is tanking.

The first company is Government Motors.

The second one is Ford.

Go Obama!

Danger Ahead

A couple of days ago I gave my explanation of why California doesn’t have any water left.  The basic idea is that when the price of a thing is reduced and limited below what the market would otherwise bare, you will experience a shortage of that thing.

This is true of water in California
This is true of housing in New York during rent control.
This is true of housing in San Francisco during rent control.
This is true of gasoline during times of rising prices.

So why is it that very smart people don’t take these lessons to heed?

Dorgan’s drug re-importation amendment is another significant hurdle. Allowing for the importation of cheaper drugs from Canada and European countries is popular among many Democrats and Republicans, giving Dorgan’s proposal a strong chance of passage.

Unbelievable.  Drug companies make drugs to sell, at a profit.  The market in the US is SO massive that they can sustain gross economic policies in other countries that force these companies to sell thier drugs for less than cost.  Now, the US wants to take those drugs from those countries and re-import them here.  For a price less than the market can bare.
Guess whats gonna happen?

Hat Tip: Say Anything

Seriously Confused

This time, it’s me I am accusing.  Not Obama.

I have been reading the reports of the unemployment situation today and two things have stood out. The first, from the BLS:

The unemployment rate edged down to 10.0 percent in November, and nonfarm payroll employment was essentially unchanged (-11,000)

And the second from MarketWatch:

The report was much better than expected by economists surveyed by MarketWatch, who were looking for 100,000 fewer jobs…

Okay, let’s start with #2 first.  I have seen several reports that show November was expected to lose 100,000 to 130,000 jobs.  And we came in losing only 11,000.  No one, not ONE single person O have seen has stopped and said, “Huh”?  This is off by just a little bit folks.  These guys were off by a FACTOR OF TEN!  No one is THAT wrong and gets away with it.  Unless of course, you are Al Gore.

So, okay, experts were wrong.  And by a lot.  But that gets us to point #1.  We still lost jobs.

In October, unemployment stood at 10.2%.  We lost jobs.  Even if it was only 1, we lost net jobs.  The rate HAS to stay the same or get worse.  Right?  Wrong.  We lost job AND the unemployment rate got better.

Weird.

Unrelated news.  Houston is expecting 2 inches of snow.  Silly polar bears need migrate!

Note to Obama

Obama is having his jobs summit today; in fact it may already be over.  In the spirit of wondering how to create more jobs, I noticed that Krugman has a solution:

Meanwhile, the federal government could provide jobs by … providing jobs. It’s time for at least a small-scale version of the New Deal’s Works Progress Administration, one that would offer relatively low-paying (but much better than nothing) public-service employment. There would be accusations that the government was creating make-work jobs, but the W.P.A. left many solid achievements in its wake. And the key point is that direct public employment can create a lot of jobs at relatively low cost. In a proposal to be released today, the Economic Policy Institute, a progressive think tank, argues that spending $40 billion a year for three years on public-service employment would create a million jobs, which sounds about right.

That got me to thinking.  There are currently about 15.7 million unemployed people in America.  Almost all are receiving some form of unemployment benefits.  How about instead of spending $40 billion a year for 3 years like Krugman says, we just make these people do the work he is suggesting and call ’em jobs?  Why would we create a program to offer “relatively low-paying” jobs for people to work when we already have a program that offers “relatively low-paying” jobs where people have to do–NOTHING!?

Krugman.  Sheesh.

Hat tip:  Forbes

California: Part III

Water water everywhere.  And not a drop to drink.

Sounds like California is thirsty:

Operators of the sprawling state system that supplies water to 25 million Californians from Butte County to San Diego issued their lowest-ever estimate on the amount of water they will be able to deliver.

Officials predicted Tuesday they will be able to offer only 5 percent of the total volume of water requested by California cities and farms next year. That’s the smallest water allocation the agency has released since its creation in 1967.

Government in Action

That’s quite a gap.  Now, to be fair, you can see in the chart above that there are years in which the water allocations eventually meet 100% of the need, but more than often, they don’t.

Makes you wonder why this is, right?  I mean California should have plenty of water to supply their need.  Why are they so short so often?  What could possible cause a shortage in a specific commodity?

Well, I just finished a fantastic book:  Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell.  And it just so happens that Mr. Sowell does indeed talk about shortages and what causes them.  One word:  Regulation.  For example, have you ever noticed that it always seems the grocery store is out of Coke when you go to buy some?  Or that gas stations always seem to be empty when you need to fill up?  I know I know.  Every time you go to buy a pair of sunglasses, there are none available?  Huh?  Never happens?  Wanna know why?  Because no one is regulating the price of these products.  They are selling at a price the market can bare.  And so supply is nearly always available.

Now, if I told you that Wal-Mart was going to be selling Coke 6-paks for a dime starting at 6pm tomorrow night, what do you think the scene would be?  Packed initially and then finally, they would run out.  They would run out when under normal circumstances, they would have a predictable supply for anybody to come and buy as much as they need/want.  And why doesn’t someone come in and buy all of the supply of Coke now?  Because the marginal cost of Coke dictates that we won’t waste or hoard it.

So, again, what cause a shortage?  Regulation; specifically the imposition of a reduced price when supply remains fixed.  So, why do you think that California State Water Project has problems meeting 100% of need?  Because they are regulations in place that reduce the cost of water for significant portions of the population:

In 2002, the average price paid for irrigation water from the CVP (Central Valley Project-An agricultural district) was less than 2 percent of what residents of Los Angeles pay for drinking water, and less than 3 percent of what residents of San Francisco pay.

What does this mean?  It means that farmers can grow crops in regions where those crops wouldn’t normally grow because it’s too dry.  But because they are getting water at less than the market rate, these farming practices are continued and water is going where it wouldn’t otherwise go.

The lesson is simple, if you want there to be a 6-pak of Coke at the local Wal-Mart, you better hope that it’s expensive enough to be there.

OJT: On the Job Training

Barack Obama.

You know it’s bad when the far left begins to give you economic advice:

Liberal Democratic lawmakers, including the Congressional Black Caucus, are unhappy with the Obama administration’s pace of efforts tackling the unemployment rate, which is a whopping 10.2 percent and expected to rise.

The CBC, in particular, say Obama officials have not done enough to address the severe economic problems in the black community. Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif, reportedly issued a warning Wednesday that the 43 members of the caucus are planning to vote with the GOP to derail a number of Democratic bills if it isn’t addressed.

However bad it is for Obama this, at least, is encouraging:

Labor support is more in favor of funding labor projects, in terms of public works, putting more money into the states and cities but the White House is concerned about the deficit.

Finally.