hmmm?

New Thinking on the Economy
by Dean Baker,
co-Director of the Center for Economic Policy Research (CEPR)

also Beat the Press

[This points to an interesting problem or ROR:
(see labels for explaination)

The government is not getting its money's worth when buying bad assets. Anyone who understands how the economy works and the market works should not wonder. That is how it works. That is the point of buying bad assets, whether one wonders whether it should be done or not. If someone else would buy them the same would apply. The housing bubble* is a similar mechanism within the greater mechanism that is the financial problem.

How the economy works is different than how economics works. The economy is the thing. Economics is an equation. They both need tweaking and can work the way they are designed, but will tweak someone. Unfortunately an equation in economics will work only to the extent that everything (that is needed or wanted) is included in it. The economy works regardless but almost everything is included, except they are tweaking when they do the economics. And speaking of bubbles, they leak.

It might be easier to agree what not to do, than what to do, as long as failure is an option. But failure is not an option; it is a choice. This may seem like lost words, but failure is a potential outcome. And it can no more be simply allowed**, than freedom. Maybe this is Philosophy 701, but the Washington Post is not up to Journalism 201, let alone the economy.]

* housing equals assets except for the financial blowing of the economics.

** meaning failure should be prevented, and freedom promoted(are these not good points to work on?)

[Speaking of link(and equations): the stimulating if not shaky journalism below.(nfry)]

[only glanced at but likely recommended read: and see comments and embedded Krugman. For now: They'll be back.]

[That was Shwartznegger but later Ron Reagan covers similar territory with a guest who earlier slammed the stimulus. That was in December, so it was not the current plan. Which should be called what is: ARARA for Jobs! or just the begining or what is a quick and practical start. But does have a good chart on "Bang for the Buck", which depending on the math(see comments), could make a 1 trillion dollar difference in effectiveness.] [Post comment comment: of course this is as ridiculous a hypothesis as Plato's Republic, but for the sake of dialogue, a totally bipartisan package, could be seen to have potential for zero stimulus, as dollar for dollar is not really a bang.]

Pass the Trillion.

The problem with some Democrats? They listen. The problem with others, they play by the rules. Grayson is the new Democrat, Franks the old Democrat. OK, I am trying not to spin this, but others spin about the situation.

I find it hard to blame the Republicans for holding the line for what they believe, right or wrong. I find it hard to urge the Democrats to hold the line by taking back from the table what may have been put in the package to appear non-partisan or to please certain pockets. But that is the nature of politics and the transparency is apparently being worked on. There still may be some passing the buck but it is about what works and change. Ching, ching, no pun.

BIG HINT: There is a table at the table;
Fiscal Economic Bank for the Buck Moody's basically seems to dispute what Republicans think(or at least say) works. In fact it seems that spending is 2 to 6 times more effective than tax cuts depending on the focus. In fact there is little bang for the buck Bush style. But this is apparently on GDP and that may not be an effective metric. One must still follow the money.

[filed]more for later
Stimulus package: Jobs gained or saved? Christopher S. Rugaber AP
Senate to demand big changes in stimulus bill. Zachary Coile, SF Chronicle

[for tinkering]
Poetic Justice
hiatus or sabbatical
Stop that!
Tinkering...
American Recovery
Previous post may take unwinding

"More Scrutiny Needed!"

Bloomberg Commentary by Betsy McCaughey
Not necessarily the one to do it.

Update: 2-13-09 [Shout Out: Media Matters]

[Update 2-12-09 "Conservative Media Echo Chamber..."
Also more on Misinformation... ]

[from dialogue with Thrasymachus * ]
...the last paragraph was an eye opener if you believe it. Well not really; it confirms my world view or rather your world view. Health care should be a growth industry and cost is no object.

But second: health-care reform is made up of more than just government programs, and will not replace the healthcare industry or the insurance industry, so it is very easy to cherry pick and hits the nail on the head with my last post:

It might be easier to agree what not to do, than what to do, as long as failure is an option. But failure is not an option; it is a choice. This may seem like lost words, but failure is a potential outcome. And it can no more be simply allowed**, than freedom. Maybe this is Philosophy 701, but the Washington Post is not up to Journalism 201, let alone the economy.

And this gal is not not up to Journalism 101. WWWWWH? (that too...or also)

BTW: I really did some ridiculous math (further amendment to my blog) that went on in the comment section. If the $800 billion (jobs bill) were purely partisan or completely extremist (utopian?) and the choice were between more Bush tax cuts, and all food stamps (which I can't imagine anyone proposing) (but probably some on the right might) the Bang for the Buck would be negative .71 / dollar or positive .73 / dollar. But that is only if some would have it only their way. HOWEVER it seems even a balanced partisan bill would result in closer to zero effectiveness. This is extreme rhetoric(and math), but seems to demolish the moderate approach as well. It does however prove the importance of new thinking rather than more of the same.

* a nickname for an emailer
** see previous post for these asterisks and below link for Bloomberg

Accidental update:

Death of a Journalist?
(Turns out he wasn't. Not regarding death but journalist.)
I get it! Darn D$!
Now, where(1) was I going?
Bang for the Bank?(2)
No...Bank for the Buck!
Yes, I really was headed for this chart, and 42itus or not, it is not apples and oranges,(3) it is jobs and economics.
[8-12-10 updated w/notations (1),(2),(3) above as Meet The Press]

Conservative Foray (4A)

The right wing rhetoric suffers
from four faults or defaults:
Anecdotal
Apocryphal
Anachronistic
Academic[*]

In particular:
Lew Rockwell
Anne Wortham
Betsy McGaughey
Floy Lilley **

I did not select these, they were being spread by a victim of the victim hoods.

[* This 4A was held in draft, and pondered till I arrived at the right Initialism. Speaking of design and initialism the origin was:
often A$$ Backward Oops!! - Pardon my Cheney , I meant acronym-ism.]

**[Hopefully I have these in descending order.]
[(CTTC)Cutting through the Cr@p:
I would love for economists to cut through some of this.]
[Academic is a word like politician and lawyer that have developed a poor reputation, not to mention rhetoric and Swift Boaters. Or Bottom Line? ]

[(CTTC2.0)I have two bold links above that I would like economists to examine, in particular in light of the bad rap Keynesian economics keeps taking. In that regard, on a lighter and less silly or harsh note; Greenspan seems to be learning, or has he, and in regards to the Floy piece and the bottom line;
is there not some synergy that needs to be worked out? Meaning current efforts cannot be compared to past efforts directly, while problems that are missed will be the devil in the detail. The Carbon Market may be a solution, but not if the Market period is the problem. In other words, I have not looked too deeply into the hot air side (climate matters) of the equation, but feel that the thin air problem (financial matters)is deeper. To re-embed in aphorism, there is bang for your buck and there is the value of your bang. And there is likely more that matters.

Rough Draft (Update/not)

[Posted AS IS 7-15-09]
democrats come through?: Reid to Baucus The Magic Number?
My original number included some strategy where 41 Democrats can maintain a filibuster but without Republicans presenting anything but opposition it is hard to see progress. But the magic is that Democrats do not need 60 votes to pass a bill, only to end a filibuster. Those are separate questions and in fact supported by the Democratic aversion to supporting a filibuster.

Obama's Clueless Liberal Critics Bruce Bartlett The Daily Beast7-8-09
pre-footnoted
1-12-09
1-28-09
1-28-09
Bang for the Buck

The one thing?

[Right Columns Being Updated]

Well...
it was a chart that demonstrates the effects on GNP for various stimulative choices.

Translation:
Tax Cuts Bad
Federal Spending Good.
This of course is overly simplified, and relative to the position on the (Laffer) bell curve for tax rates.
Permanent tax cuts do not get even get half their money's worth of stimulative effect, while all categories under federal spending get well more than their buck's bang.

Speaking of "Killing two birds with one stone"...
Rachel Maddow [*] addresses the issue of Wisconsin and why Democrats exist(economic populism).
(Wall Street Journal/NBC Poll)

[Navigation aid: see bold link(s)]
[UPDATE 1-22-11 Keith and Rachel, D-part meant of Corrections and Stephanie Miller]
[Bottom Line? Democrats can stand strong and the American people will support them, and standing with the unions of Wisconsin and collective bargaining will be what the average American supports, the lopsided money and media to the contrary.]
[Potential follow-up: No to Violence, No to Prank News: But seriously.]
[*] my apologies the bold Rachel Maddow link has been corrected
[further Huckabee, Ed Schultz, Norman Goldman**, and Reverse Re-Verses.]
** must add show link for Norman

Running List and reference links

[Update: 8-13-07 only the link has been added]

[IMPORTANT UPDATE 3-29-07]
FOR PRESIDENTIAL PROFILES
GO HERE

[I will here update(3-17-07) the running list, without explanation but with a more inclusive link: Think Progress Trends
Kucinich
Edwards, Richardson, Obama
Clark
Dodd
Biden
Clinton ]


Democrats in '08, my original list

New York Times List

The Frame? "Hit and Run"...with a bang and the buck!

The Philosophy !

Just - A Thought. The links there are about the Attorney Generals unified philosophy, replacements at Justice, Absolute Power, physic of Iraq history, and the geometric irony of military approaches alone.

Just: a thought. Justice is the point of the constitution*, and life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is our project, not putting wants over needs.

* links will be amended here without dates, except for this post any editing of my other posts will be noted in comments. The first four posts above will remain intact, and the index will flow from there: note that there are Just - A Thought & Just: a thought are intentionally puctuated differently-- just a hint.