Macroeconomics

I’m not boasting, but I feel that I’m qualified to expound on such a weighty subject because of my extensive background in the field. I've studied both microeconomics and macroeconomics for an entire semester each at a local community college. Macroeconomics is the big picture view of the economy; what sort of economic system is the best for keeping us fat and happy, or lean and grumpy if that's what you're into.

After much pondering and wailing and gnashing of teeth, I’ve drawn a conclusion. When you encounter the phrase, “Most economists say...,” immediately check to see if your wallet is secure and turn your bonkercockie detector all the way up.

In 2009, Econ Journal Watch, “....a forum about economics research and the economics profession,” published the results of a survey of economists to determine areas of consensus (and disagreement) among members of the prestigious American Economics Association, est. 1885. This study, and others since, point to broad areas of consensus, at least on certain economic questions.  

Unfortunately, by the sixth paragraph, we’re told to take all this with a grain of salt because there are all sorts of variables that might render a given supposed consensus, in a given situation, false.      

“Economics,” as defined by Wikipedia, “is the social science that analyzes the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services.” Carefully note the phrase social science. We place a lot of faith in the physical sciences because in theory (pun intended) it’s possible to produce the same results from a given experiment, done the exact same way, every time.

Mainstream economists go to a great deal of trouble to collect and analyze the available data about a specific economic question, build computer models, draw graphs and solve equations. Then they come up with different answers and fight over them. For example:

Douglas W. Elmendorf, Ph.D., director of the Congressional Budget Office from 1.22.09 until 3.31.15, has carefully examined the data and has determined, unequivocally, that the Obama stimulus program worked.

J.D. Foster, Ph.D., former senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation, former Associate Director of the OMB and currently deputy chief economist at the U.S Chamber of Commerce has carefully examined the data and has determined, unequivocally, that the Obama stimulus program failed.

"THERE ISN’T ANY RELIABLE INCONTROVERTIBLE EVIDENCE TO DECISIVELY CONFIRM EITHER SIDE’S VIEWS is everything that’s wrong about macroeconomics and the people who write about it." So says Russ Roberts, one of my heroes. He was specifically talking about Keynesian v. Austrian economics but his statement still holds true in this context.

I won't bore you by detailing each sides position. I'm sure you're sick of your favorite media sources endless analyses of Keynesian economic policies and why our The Gubmint embraces them. I'm just relieved we can still count on the Fourth Estate to do its job.

A current economic issue that affects us all just now is the debate over what policies will get our sluggish economy back on track. There are well-meaning, intelligent folks advocating everything from anarcho-capitalism to the squishy middle to a European-style welfare state (social democracy) to communism. The system we have in the USA is described as a mixed economy, a free market system but with no shortage of (over) regulation and a hefty dash (and growing) of welfare state. This leads me to another conclusion.

[I apologize in advance to anyone that is expecting me to light the nation's path out of the darkness. I do have an opinion, but opinions, as they say, are like...noses, everyone has one.]

We’re drowning in opinions and information. The information age makes it possible for any old fart, like myself, for example, to at least potentially join the deluge. Irony alert: Access to virtually unlimited information and opinions makes the “old school” notion that we need people and institutions we can rely on to act as information filters more important than ever. When it comes to economics my filter is, “Economics In One Lesson”  written by Henry Hazlitt and published in 1946.

The one lesson is, “The art of economics consists in looking not merely at the immediate but at the longer effects of any act or policy; it consists in tracing the consequences of that policy not merely for one group but for all groups” (my emphasis). Note the phrase, “art of economics.”

The (slim) book expands on this lesson without a single graph or equation. It’s easily available in its original form as well as in updated versions. When I’m king (oh crap, there he goes again) you will have to demonstrate familiarity with this book to get out of high school.

People that disagree with Hazlitt’s conclusions should study it because if you can’t make a convincing argument as to why a given conclusion is wrong, his simple logic will crush you. But you want to know the truth, right? You’re not just out to promote an agenda or confirm your biases, right?

Have an OK day.


[P.S. Gentlereaders, for 25¢ a week, no, seriously, for 25¢ a week you can become a Patron of this weekly column and help to prevent an old crank from running the streets at night in search of cheap thrills and ill-gotten gains.

If there are some readers out there that think my shtuff is worth a buck or three a month, color me honored, and grateful. Regardless, if you like it, could you please share it? There are buttons at the end of every column.]


©2015 Mark Mehlmauer   (The Flyoverland Crank)

If you're reading this on my website (where there are tons of older columns, a glossary, and other goodies) and if you wish to react (way cooler than liking) -- please scroll down.

    

 

 

      

     

   

Seven Dirty Words

George Carlin and his famous seven dirty words that you can’t say on TV routine literally changed the world, well, at least for those of us living in the USA. Mr. Carlin’s routine was, and still is, a comic masterpiece. However, it's a perfect illustration of one of my generations (baby boomers) more unfortunate tendencies -- tossing the tot out with the Jacuzzi water.  

We boomers grew up in an era of unprecedented affluence and scientific advances. We took this for granted, we thought this was normal. Even if the Greatest Generation (GG) had made a more determined effort to keep our feet on the ground it probably wouldn’t have done much good. They were our parents. Most parents are wired to want the best for their kids, even the parents that turn out to not be very good at being parents. Most parents will continue to want the best for their kids, even the kids that turn out to not be very good at being human offspring and opt for the high functioning chimpanzee track.

Most parents think (hope) their kids are special, and continue to tell them so, even once they realize their kids may be as flawed as they are, potentially even more so. The GG told the BBs we were special; they were amazed, and grateful, to be sharing a reality with us that was in many aspects even better than the dreams that had sustained them through the Great Depression and the Second World War. They told us we were special and lucky and that we had at least the potential to accomplish things they couldn't even imagine. After all, America put men on the moon less than a decade after JFK made it a national goal, clearly, the future was so bright the sunglasses industry wouldn’t be able to keep up with demand.  

Aside: Before continuing I must apologize if anything above or below triggers an anxiety attack of such magnitude that the reader's hands begin trembling with enough velocity to enable them to tint paint without the benefit of a machine. I know you had a terrible childhood and now thanks to me, your hands are shaking so badly you can’t get the lid off the Xanax bottle. Deep breath, deep breath, there you go, pop a couple of them babies and lay down, ain’t it time for Dr. Phil? So sorry, just relax, the rest of us will carry on without you. No, really, you’ve nothing to be embarrassed about, just chill.

Where was I? Oh, yeah, growing up baby boomer and being raised by parents that literally saved the world. If you were lucky enough to come of age taking food, clothing, and shelter, not to mention TV, stereo sound, various vaccines, McDonald's french fries (not the frankenfries they serve now, the ones made from fresh potatoes and fried in lard, as God intended) and the like for granted -- soup lines and fighting a world war that we could’ve lost resulting in enslavement if you were lucky, death if you weren’t -- is like, hard to relate to man.

Thanks mom and dad but look at all the stuff that's still wrong with the world, you need to get out of the way, we've got a utopia to build and we're in a hurry. We need to blow up a lot of the goofy beliefs you hold that are standing in the way of us establishing heaven on earth. For example, words are words, why are you so uptight about words, why do you want to censor everything?

Which brings us (finally...) to the seven dirty words and tot tossing. Words, obviously, are symbols. The word tree is not a tree, it's a label. If we were to decide that tree spelled backward, eert, was a better label and this new word caught on with our fellow speakers of English, trees could become eerts. Since eert is a bit awkward looking and sounding it would probably morph into ert. Ain't no thing, words are just words. Hunny look! ain't doze erts budafull? 

Bonkercockie! Words are the building blocks of language, language enables the networking of human minds, the networking of human minds enables us to survive, with a touch of style, a reality that is, "...solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short (Thomas Hobbes). Words, their meanings, and how they are used are important in the same way that the composition of building materials, and how they are assembled, determines whether your home is a hut or a house.  

Words have power. How much, and what kind of power, depends on their context and meaning. Language, how you use words, supplies the context and shapes the meaning. I've been known to use the phrase, what the hell. I've also been known to use the phrase, WTF. I use the world-famous acronym WTF here because I respect the power of the f-word and because the acronym works better within the context of this blog.  

If words are just words why is the psychic shrapnel from F-bombs tossed by tots more lethal than the psychic shrapnel of F-bombs tossed by truck drivers? Why do we want to toss the tots into a Jacuzzi and wash their mouths out with soap?  

Have an OK day.


[P.S. Gentlereaders, for 25¢ a week, no, seriously, for 25¢ a week you can become a Patron of this weekly column and help to prevent an old crank from running the streets at night in search of cheap thrills and ill-gotten gains.

If there are some readers out there that think my shtuff is worth a buck or three a month, color me honored, and grateful. Regardless, if you like it, could you please share it? There are buttons at the end of every column.]


©2015 Mark Mehlmauer   (The Flyoverland Crank)

If you're reading this on my website (where there are tons of older columns, a glossary, and other goodies) and if you wish to react (way cooler than liking) -- please scroll down.

Why I'm Not Pro-Choice or Pro-Life

“The abortion industry’s premise is: At no point in the gestation of a human infant does this living being have a trace of person-hood that must be respected. Never does it have a moral standing superior to a tumor or a hamburger in mother’s stomach.” This is a quote from a recent George Will column about the gruesome secretly recorded videos of abortion doctors negotiating the price for pieces/parts of aborted fetuses.  

I wish to make two points before getting to the subject at hand. First, I am an old crank from Flyoverland and I apologize if what follows is not your cup of tea. It’s just not possible to always keep it light in this world, although it is a noble goal. Second, I’m sorry but I just can’t bring myself to use the word one in this or anything I write as in, “If one is pro-abortion.” You are, you’re not, or you're indifferent to the issue.

One is inclined to feel as if one is a pompous ass if one uses the word one in this context. Hey, I didn’t say there wouldn’t be attempts at humor, however lame. Humor is another noble goal.   

Let me begin by announcing my firm support for neither faction.

They've been at each other for 42 years (and counting). I don’t even care for the politically correct labels that they use. Pro-choice? This phrase sounds as if it refers to supporting the right of coffee shops to have as many different versions of coffee that they can dream up (and sell at ridiculous prices).

If you’re pro-abortion you don’t like the term because it rightly provokes a certain squeamishness in many people, perhaps even yourself. “I’m not pro-abortion, I’m pro-abortion rights.” Whatever. The simple fact is that the later the abortion occurs the better the chances this potential little mammal with a big brain will have become a person, and since it’s not possible to determine exactly when a fetus becomes a person, it’s easier to try to not think about it and hide behind the term pro-choice.  

Certain organizations, such as Planned Parenthood, take the position that no restrictions should be placed on a woman's right to have an abortion at any stage of her pregnancy. The supreme court has ruled that a given state has the right to ban abortions once a fetus is determined to be viable, that is, can survive outside the uterus, and 43 out of 50 states have done so. Why?

Because post-viability abortion may be infanticide. I don’t pretend to know when a fetus becomes a person, but I think a civilized society should err on the side of caution. If I were king (the reader groans...) I’d limit abortion to the first trimester for the simple reason that by twelve weeks the fetus looks like a baby, Works for me.

Wait a minute! perhaps we should hold off on deciding this until cheap birth control is available at every convenience store and science develops a morning-after pill that’s available over the counter.     

Pro-life? The vast majority of us are pro-life. Most of us also love mom, apple pie, and Fords. You’re anti-abortion, but you say you’re pro-life because it sounds nobler. Yeah, I understand how passionate you may be about this, I’m a grandfather. However, many of you are even more rigid in your beliefs than your opponents.

Note to your movement: stating that abortion is always wrong, even if rape or incest is involved, may make you feel righteous, or get you votes if you’re a politician, but it causes a lot of folks to think you’re nuts.

Again, I don’t have any idea when a fetus becomes a person. I do know that people, with the best of intentions, screw up. I’m a living embodiment of this fact. I also know that desperate people do desperate things. I know, and so do you, that just because something is illegal it doesn’t prevent someone from seeking out a given product or service, and that there’s always someone willing to provide it if the price is right, no matter the danger to all involved. Do we really want to return to the days of women skulking down a proverbial back alley?

The bottom line is that without a compromise this controversy will never end. It's unlikely there ever will be a compromise because both sides are equally sure they are right, passionate about it, and equally unwilling to back down. The tendency of our absurd media culture to promote controversy and oversimplify for the sake of their bottom line or agenda makes everything worse.  

In the meantime, as the CSNY song says, “teach your children well.” Teach them abstinence, promiscuity or something in between, it’s your job. Regardless of what you believe it’s also your job, no, it’s your duty, to explain that a condom not only prevents pregnancy it may also save their life. 

 Have an OK day.


[P.S. Gentlereaders, for 25¢ a week, no, seriously, for 25¢ a week you can become a Patron of this weekly column and help to prevent an old crank from running the streets at night in search of cheap thrills and ill-gotten gains.

If there are some readers out there that think my shtuff is worth a buck or three a month, color me honored, and grateful. Regardless, if you like it, could you please share it? There are buttons at the end of every column.]


©2017 Mark Mehlmauer   (The Flyoverland Crank)

If you're reading this on my website (where there are tons of older columns, a glossary, and other goodies) and if you wish to react (way cooler than liking) -- please scroll down.