I have issues with this Yglesian economics, but time does not permit. Just to start it off, however, I am skeptical of this:
On the labor market it’s similar. Someone like Greg Mankiw or myself who has the opportunity to do freelance writing work really should respond to transient tax cuts with increased output. But given that the tax cuts will be transient, our current increased output will be reduced in the future with reduced output with taxes are raised. The money has to be repaid, after all, out of tax revenue and with interest. And rational agents making long- or medium-term plans about their own human capital and life decisions should be basically indifferent to transient changes in tax rates. The issue is the long-term tax burden which is determined by the level of spending.
Just for starters, it may be true that an entrepeneur looking at a ten year plan may not choose to focus on tranisent tax rates. But if Mankiw and Yglesais passed on big book advances in 2010 because they figured that an advance in 2011 would be just as valuable, well, that was not very astute economic planning.
And I have lost all the links, but an NRO observer made the same point yesterday that I made in 2003 - many of the Bush tax cuts may have been admirable (such as the family tax credit) but they couldn't be characterized as "supply-side".
Dennis the Peasant has issues, too.
Yglesias:
That may be among the more persuasive arguments against tax cuts and for tax increases I have seen from the left. Cut taxes and Yglesias will write more. Raise taxes and he will write less.
TM:
On The Road
Turn off your cellphone! For the children!
Posted by: hit and run | November 19, 2010 at 09:12 AM
The money has to be repaid...
What money?
Tax cuts are not spending. They're reduced theft. If spending is cut, there's nothing to repay.
But, then, Yglesias et. al. consider us all chattle of the state, not free individuals.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | November 19, 2010 at 09:38 AM
O/T If TM insists on boring us with nonsensical Yglesias links, I have no recourse other than to LUN something of substance.
Posted by: Captain Hate | November 19, 2010 at 09:44 AM
jobs will not come back until startups and small business feel confident they can make decisions.
the healthcare bill is still a big uncertainty (and cost) they have to deal with to hire.
let's hope when the new congress comes in they make a difference in stability.
Posted by: Army of Davids | November 19, 2010 at 09:54 AM
Why would you start a business in this business climate?
Posted by: Army of Davids | November 19, 2010 at 09:54 AM
Tax cuts are not spending. They're reduced theft.
What's that one about the last refuge of a scoundrel? Which refuge is this b.s. about "paying for tax cuts"? (And which potential candidate would best shove it down Obama's throat if he tried this flim-flam in a debate?)
Posted by: Extraneus | November 19, 2010 at 10:23 AM
Those of us who support lower marginal tax rates want them to be permanent (in the sense that they won't expire by their terms; the way Congress and POTUS fiddle around with things, they won't be permanent).
We support the two year extension only because it appears that a two year extension appears to be the best we can get at the moment.
By the way, I know I've said this before, but it bears repeating that high marginal tax rates and high estate tax rates don't harm the rich (those who can live comfortably off investment income). They hurt the entreprenurial class most. They impose a drag on the economy that limits social mobility and results, especially when combined with the bureaucratic state, in a sclerotic society with a dim economic outlook. This is so obvious that it is necessary to be a credentialled moron not to be able to figure this out.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | November 19, 2010 at 10:29 AM
Why wouldn't an entrepreneur consider transient rates... but only to ignore and discount the possibility that rates might increase in the future?
Our entrepreneur might consider (1) the possibility that rates won't go up in the distant future, (2) the benefit of having the extra profit in his pocket for at least some period of time, (3) the fact that if rates do go up, he can cut his output back at that time, and (4) that he could be dead by then, making it someone else's problem.
Posted by: steve | November 19, 2010 at 10:31 AM
1 in 5 Americans have mental illness???
Well, I'm pretty sure the "mental illness" definition is pretty broad. Feeling sad?...you are now mentally ill.
Posted by: Janet | November 19, 2010 at 10:41 AM
TM remembers something he wrote in 2003? I can't even find my pen. Drat!
Posted by: Clarice | November 19, 2010 at 10:41 AM
"the healthcare bill is still a big uncertainty (and cost) they have to deal with to hire."
Hire for Obamacare could be dwarfed by hiring to enforce S510. The small job losses are incalculable.
The healthcare bill is small potatoes compared to the S510 bill. I'm pretty sure I've seen a few JOMers talk about their gardens or fruit trees--all could gone under S510. At least one JOMer has indicated that he runs a family farm--all could be gone under S510.
People in Cuba could end up with more freedom to grow their own food than Americans would have under S510.
Not only would S510 restrict what Americans could do with their own food supply under American law; it would introduce massive new UN Control over Americans.
American Thinker has two good articles on stopping S510.
First heathcare, next the food.
S510 musrt be stopped.
Posted by: Pagar | November 19, 2010 at 10:55 AM
Since thar Archive function on this blog, is proscribed, I had to do something date and topic specific googling in order to pull up
that first post, btw there was a lot of Spam
in that first year
Posted by: narciso | November 19, 2010 at 10:58 AM
To punctuate your point, Ext, look at this kick to the solar plexus being delivered to Bernanke in the LUN
Posted by: narciso | November 19, 2010 at 11:03 AM
"Tax cuts are not spending."
Rob that one simple statement is the root of the entire fight with Progs. Their entire house of cards is based on that premise.
Posted by: Old Lurker | November 19, 2010 at 11:21 AM
Where has Steadman Shabazz disappeared to after promising "Full Victory" in the Ghailani trial a year ago? Man up time.
Posted by: Captain Hate | November 19, 2010 at 11:30 AM
Yes Pagar,
Mark Levin was on a rant about the invasive FDA S510 bill passing yesterday. Goodbye to small entrepreneurs and farmer's markets. I think he said there were 12-15 Repub votes for it.
Posted by: SWarren | November 19, 2010 at 11:30 AM
14 Repukes voted for it including the Maine twins and Voinovich getting his last digs in before a real Repub takes over next year.
Posted by: Captain Hate | November 19, 2010 at 11:39 AM
According to the comments at AT, the count was really 15, all in need of a primary opponent.
Posted by: Captain Hate | November 19, 2010 at 11:44 AM
Supposedly, the bill was amended to exempt small farms from the worst aspects, while still putting them under the control of the gov.
Posted by: DebinNC | November 19, 2010 at 11:47 AM
Ah Chambliss, I have come to regard him much
as the Duke Bros, when they said 'Winthorpe',
god, he has proven utterly useless, since they brought him back in 2004 runoff
Posted by: narciso | November 19, 2010 at 11:48 AM
Section 133b, "Authority to Prohibit or Restrict the Movement of Food," sponsored by Congressman Dingell
Wow.
So while the left rails that people cannot march in Gay Pride parades while serving in the military, they're busy giving the government authority to artificially create famines.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | November 19, 2010 at 11:50 AM
I know a lot of libs that will be up in arms (figuratively speaking since they are all gun haters) if their beloved farmers' markets are taken away.
Posted by: Porchlight | November 19, 2010 at 12:04 PM
Globe exposé on corruption in the MA state government (I know, you're shocked):Lawmakers">http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/11/19/lawmakers_fed_budget_to_keep_jobs_coming/">Lawmakers fed budget to keep jobs coming
For fun I'll let you follow the link and see the key sentence of the article, all the way at the end of paragraph 17, but see if you can guess what it is first.First two ¶,'s:
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | November 19, 2010 at 12:07 PM
Lots of Buy Local and No Farms No Food bumper stickers out there, usually right next to Hope and Change. The disconnect is going to drive the lefties crazy.
Posted by: laura | November 19, 2010 at 12:07 PM
Rob, go to snopes.com and search for "garden".
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | November 19, 2010 at 12:08 PM
Don't read the rest of this post if you want to take Dave(in MA)'s quiz without a hint.
Hint: If the corruption involved the Tea Party or the Republican Party, paragraph seventeen would have become paragraph one.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | November 19, 2010 at 12:12 PM
Yes, indeed, Laura. The light bringer will not be happy until he has pissed off every single American not on his staff.
Posted by: Clarice | November 19, 2010 at 12:12 PM
T-Col, I'd say it would have been in the headline.
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | November 19, 2010 at 12:15 PM
Iglesias is obviously right on his main point, which is that a tax cut without spending cuts just means higher taxes (or inflation) later. That's just arithmetic. And bouncing around tax rates to try to micromanage the business cycle is as dumb as trying to do that with the Fed's balance sheet.
But I'll still take tax cuts now in the hope that the spending cuts will follow. That was Reagan's view: "Take away their allowance."
Posted by: jimmyk | November 19, 2010 at 12:16 PM
Are Obama's prints on the "food bill" or is he just voting present and allowing it to happen?
Posted by: DebinNC | November 19, 2010 at 12:18 PM
Hello from Mexico! Were your ears ringing last night because we were talking about you?
Posted by: Jane | November 19, 2010 at 12:19 PM
What Iglesias is arguing over is whether there is a Keynsian multiplier > 1. The Kenysian's argument that the muliplier > 1 on exogenous changes in spending by Govt depends works only if consumers do not take into account the lowered future income resulting from bond financing as asserted by Friedman via the Permanent Income Hypothesis. This led Friedman and others to conclude that tax and bond financing of Govermnent expdenditures are equivalent. Hence, the only real impact upon private production would be by reduced Govt spending.
Posted by: DougS | November 19, 2010 at 12:19 PM
narc, we almost have a remake of Trading Places cast regarding all the major roles. If you want Chambliss to play either Randolph or Mortimer Duke, I won't object; although my choices would be Rove and Cornyn, maybe Schmidt deserves consideration also. Ophelia might be a problem because I don't know who we could find for a hooker with a heart of gold; Mega McCanns only fits half the bill which is maybe a compensation for how she fits her clothes.
Posted by: Captain Hate | November 19, 2010 at 12:22 PM
Hi, Jane! Hope you all are having a wonderful time. Can't wait to hear more.
Posted by: Porchlight | November 19, 2010 at 12:23 PM
Accompanied by a pompous, sanctimonious editorial about GOP or Tea Party greed corrupting good government, Dave(in MA).
Posted by: Thomas Collins | November 19, 2010 at 12:24 PM
Hi Jane; have you talked anybody into contributing to JOM?
Posted by: Captain Hate | November 19, 2010 at 12:24 PM
Ask the Soviets how that "control of the movement of food" worked out for them.
Posted by: Old Lurker | November 19, 2010 at 12:28 PM
This Tea Party indipendent is pro small business and free trade.
Bernanke did a bad thing by giving political coverage to congress on accusing China of "currency manipulation". It is the pot calling the kettle black.
The Yuan (RMB) has appreciated 25% vs the USD since 2005.
What has happened to the cost of commodities (oil) during that time?
What has happened to the job market?
Be careful what you wish for. And any currency/trade bill with Schumer or Lindsey Graham's endorsement is a huge mistake.
Posted by: Army of Davids | November 19, 2010 at 12:31 PM
Actually the government has been restricting movements of food to control the spread of pests for decades. I'm trying to remember what it was that you couldn't carry with you on the airplane from Hawaii to California 26 years ago...
Posted by: cathyf | November 19, 2010 at 12:31 PM
Rob, go to snopes.com and search for "garden".
Dave, snopes is not all that reassuring on this one.
For example,
The bill defines the term "food production facility" to be "any farm, ranch, orchard, vineyard, aquaculture facility, or confined animal-feeding operation." It's something of a stretch to interpret that definition as applying to persons who maintain home-based vegetable gardens or otherwise grow small amounts of food for personal consumption.
How is it a stretch?
No language in HR 875 mandates that farms (organic or otherwise) use of any particular fertilizer or pesticide, or requires the use of either of those products in general. The bill merely calls upon the FSA to establish regulations regarding "minimum standards related to fertilizer use."
Oh, that's all... except there's no limit to what "minimum standards" can be imposed by a government that sees fit to tell you what lightbulbs you can use, how much water your toilet can contain, and that sees a law-abiding citizen getting on an airplane as a chance for copping a feel.
They cite as an authority the entirely unbiased source of the House bill's author, who says:
There is no language in the bill that would regulate, penalize, or shut down backyard gardens. The focus of the bill is to ensure the safety of food in interstate commerce.
Except that the Supreme Court has already ruled that growing wheat for your own use counts as "interstate commerce", so that "answer" is bullshit at best.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | November 19, 2010 at 12:36 PM
Dennis the Peasant has issues, too.
I'll say.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | November 19, 2010 at 12:37 PM
We are having the best time ever! What do you want them to contribute Capn? We sat with a woman last night who is a reader here, and Caro exclaimed - That's Jane - which was hysterically funny and a bit scary to me. Then we both realized that we have knicknames for everyone's nicknames.
I can't seem to make the punctuation work here, but we would say things like - Man tran is here and we realized that was not his whole name. She did say she hates your name Capn. I explained we could not talk you out of it and loved you anyway.
Just wait til I tell you the bernie Goldberg story - which is very very funny.
Posted by: Jane | November 19, 2010 at 12:37 PM
Actually the government has been restricting movements of food to control the spread of pests for decades. I'm trying to remember what it was that you couldn't carry with you on the airplane from Hawaii to California 26 years ago...
There are state restrictions on some items, precisely for that purpose. Semis heading into Florida have to be inspected for restricted species of plants and animals.
But we've already given the government that authority. Why do they need more? It's not to stop the sale or production of unsafe foods -- they already have that authority, too.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | November 19, 2010 at 12:39 PM
Ethridge concedes to Renee Elmers. Hope to get to ask you the famous question in a year or so, Bob. Only problem is, I won't remember what you look like.
Posted by: Extraneus | November 19, 2010 at 12:40 PM
Well, I'm pretty sure the "mental illness" definition is pretty broad. Feeling sad?...you are now mentally ill.
Well, I'm pretty sure that "depression" isn't "feeling sad."
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | November 19, 2010 at 12:41 PM
Well, I'm pretty sure that "depression" isn't "feeling sad."
Well, I'm pretty sure that any "study" that says 20% of the population is "mentally ill" is unlikely to restrict itself to the clinical definitions.
Posted by: Rob Crawford | November 19, 2010 at 12:43 PM
What do you want them to contribute Capn?
Whatever they want; all non-troll input is desirable.
She did say she hates your name Capn. I explained we could not talk you out of it and loved you anyway.
Well I ain't changing; my nic predates my appearance here and is even applied to me in the *real* world. I appreciate the feedback though.
Posted by: Captain Hate | November 19, 2010 at 12:46 PM
Posted by: Neo | November 19, 2010 at 12:47 PM
Clarice,
Because of the BSE scare while we lived in England, my husband and I and I guess now our 19 year old cannot donate blood. Unhappy with the way the US beef industry responded to
possible BSE contamination we decided not to eat beef unless it was organic or grass fed. Our beef eating declined measurably, but we were unwilling to give up our traditional standing rib roast. This led to hunting down small farms for grass fed beef. Fortunately, the internet and increasing demand has made this pretty easy. For the last few years we have gotten our beef, they do pork(acorn fed) and lamb as well from a Charlottesville area farm that ships.
http://www.gryffonsaerie.com/
I would highly recommend them. They decided not to go organic because the regs were impossible. This family run farm is exactly the kind of place that will be squeezed by this bill.
Posted by: laura | November 19, 2010 at 12:48 PM
Well I guess I must return to vacation now. See You Too for how karl Rove's star is fading but Dan Hannan's is really really high.
Catcha on Sunday
Posted by: Jane | November 19, 2010 at 12:50 PM
Well, I'm pretty sure the "mental illness" definition is pretty broad. Feeling sad?...you are now mentally ill.
Does the number of mentally ill track with the number of liberals?
Posted by: Sue | November 19, 2010 at 12:50 PM
Being gay used to be called "mentally ill" so take the criteria with at least a small degree of skepticism.
Posted by: Captain Hate | November 19, 2010 at 12:50 PM
I can't imagine Cap'n being any other than Cap'n.
I'm still getting over Barney Frank becoming Iggy, not to mention our poor lost forever "Other Tom" becoming a river in Europe.
The one I did like was Sad becoming Bad.
Posted by: Old Lurker | November 19, 2010 at 12:53 PM
Sue I think the number of Libs is making ME ill.
Posted by: Old Lurker | November 19, 2010 at 12:55 PM
Sue: On another thread I noted that someone (was it Weasel Zipper?) had remarked that the 20% mentally ill exactly matched the percentage of people who claim to be Liberal.
Can't wait to hear Jane's and Caro's cruise tales!!
Posted by: centralcal | November 19, 2010 at 01:04 PM
1 in 5?? Way too LOW!
Posted by: bunky | November 19, 2010 at 01:07 PM
Stop me if I' wrong, but by definition locovores only eat locally grown foods and therefore any sanitation problem would be localized and a risk those consumers seem willing to take.
I've never understood why veggies grown in shit are better for you than those grown with commercial fertilizers and treated with pesticides. I mean, you are supposed to wash your produce before eating.
And no one has found a single nutritional benefit from expensively (in labor and land use) grown organic stuff so why bother except to meet the luddite fantasies of the greenies.
Almost all food borne problems--like e-coli (not sure about BSE) can be resolved by the perfectly safe means of irradiating food which is grown by large growers or processed in large facilities only the remaining onus on *shudder* radiation spawned by Nader keeps us from this simple, healthful measure.
As for BSE, I think the banning of feed containing bone and meat for cattle seems to have nicely resolved the issue. For my two cents the best beef roasts are to be had at Costco.
Posted by: Clarice | November 19, 2010 at 01:07 PM
Have a glass if Cabernet for me, Jane (or a bottle if you prefer).
I hope Captain Hate remains Captain Hate.
Only a fifth of us Americans are nutso? Didn't General Gage think we were all bonkers? What are we, getting soft as we get closer to our Tricentennial?
Posted by: Thomas Collins | November 19, 2010 at 01:09 PM
I missed Jane while I was at lunch!?!!1?!!?!1?? I eat lunch maybe twice a month and I miss Jane because of it?
Lunch sucks. I'm never eating lunch again.
Posted by: hit and run | November 19, 2010 at 01:11 PM
Good idea,hit. According to the food freaks, eating will kill you.
Be very afraid/
(Of course, just a few generations ago my ancestors were dying of a more common problem--no food at all-- but in our cozy, mental fluffiness, we can scare ourselves worrying about fantastical threats.)
Posted by: Clarice | November 19, 2010 at 01:14 PM
No Bill that is sponsored by Sen Durbin should ever be trusted. S510 is just like Obamacare. The rules and regulations covering it haven't been written. Snopes doesn't know any more about what will be in those rules and regulations than the man in the moon, they are just reading off the leftist propaganda sheets like the rest of the leftist MSM.
Small farms exempt--I'm pretty sure you'll find a lot of farmers that will tell you that $500,000 is not a large farm.
Instead of exempting people/farms stop the bill before it messes up millions of Americans lives just to give the leftists more control of EVERY aspect of American life.
Call every American you know that produces food or uses food and ask them to help defeat this attack on American freedom.
Posted by: Pagar | November 19, 2010 at 01:17 PM
Well, the Obama Administration may be undercutting voucher programs for kids, but at least the kids will be getting Michelle Certified Salads. See LUN.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | November 19, 2010 at 01:20 PM
Hillbuzz is asking for help in voting for Governor Palin over at FOX:
FOX 2012 Poll
This morning I saw a disturbed woman say that Palin is not an asset... she is an A$$. Really loverly. Go Vote!
Posted by: Ann | November 19, 2010 at 01:22 PM
Pagar, Tom Coburn is holding the food bill hostage to a vote to ban earmarks. Harkin hopes Coburn relents, but I bet he won't.
Posted by: DebinNC | November 19, 2010 at 01:30 PM
She was probably just looking in the mirror,
Ann, the Rombots have spammed that site, as the Paulians did earlier
Posted by: narciso | November 19, 2010 at 01:30 PM
Ann: I have already been voting, every day!!! Have you guys read the piece at Real Clear Politics on Palin? Excellent.
Don't have the link, right now, but HotAir in their headlines has it.
Posted by: centralcal | November 19, 2010 at 01:31 PM
Not economics but energy related. Driving to St. Louis yesterday, the host of a local show was interviewing two executives with Mid-Rivers electric coop. They take call in questions. Many questioners were asking what about rising bills, and they were saying, as politely as possible, that regulations and "renewable" mandates are going to raise rates, and there's nothing they can do about it. Also, and this really struck me. They said there has been 30000 MW of coal power shut down in the LAST YEAR, and nothing is really being done to replace it. They said to expect shortages forthwith, especially since EPA is expected to start regulating CO2 emissions next year. So, no coal, no Natural Gas, no Nuclear. So much for that economic recovery.
Posted by: Pofarmer | November 19, 2010 at 01:31 PM
The ground beef from Schwans is irradiated. It is really nice to be able to pull hamburger patties out of the freezer and not have to be OCD about touching anything...
Posted by: cathyf | November 19, 2010 at 01:32 PM
Yes, it comes from Scott Conroy, who we've had some issues with in the past, cc, but it is good at outlining her advisors strategy.
Ah Po, you can't say Obama doesn't keep his promises,btw, if this is being released tomorrow, it's got to be a scorcher, in the LUN
Posted by: narciso | November 19, 2010 at 01:35 PM
Here's a gem:
Biden: Obama viewed as aloof because he’s ’so brilliant’
That sounds kinda racist to me.
Posted by: Ann | November 19, 2010 at 01:35 PM
Heh, 'that word you are using' what does that have to do with the price of creamed corn in Iowa, Joe
Posted by: narciso | November 19, 2010 at 01:38 PM
This Reason TV report shows what the future for small farmers will hold.
What do I mean, the future. This is now!
Now, personally I'm into cooked food and pasteurized dairy products, but if these guys want to eat raw, that's up to them.
Posted by: Kevin B | November 19, 2010 at 01:38 PM
I just canceled a financial newsletter I have read for a good many years because one of their editors just published an unprovoked attack on Sarah Palin thinking that would see more newsletters. He lost any future money from me and hopefully many many more subcribers will do the same.
Posted by: Pagar | November 19, 2010 at 01:43 PM
O/T and posted especially for the men commenters who are fans of Megyn Kelly.
You have never seen her like this before! (Well, maybe, in your imagination - heh!)
Posted by: centralcal | November 19, 2010 at 01:44 PM
My bad, she actually blurted, "I say she's an extraordinary ass, frankly."
Former ABC Reporter Jami Floyd Slams Sarah Palin as an 'Extraordinary Ass' on MSNBC
Posted by: Ann | November 19, 2010 at 01:44 PM
raised in a Caucasian neighborhood
Is Bite Me lumping the majority Asian populace in Honolulu into "Caucasian"? Or maybe Obama's typical white grandma lived in a typical whites-only condo?
Posted by: DebinNC | November 19, 2010 at 01:44 PM
Small farms exempt--I'm pretty sure you'll find a lot of farmers that will tell you that $500,000 is not a large farm.
It's not only $500,000. It's within 235 mi or something from home. Now, what that will be changed to, is interstate, I'm sure, anything that crosses state lines, or has the POTENTIAL to cross state lines, will be suspect. Not only that, it won't be just the farmers, it will be the packers and processors and butchers and auction houses and everything else that will be regulated. Many will simply call it quits.
Posted by: Pofarmer | November 19, 2010 at 01:46 PM
Clarice, except that it was not banned until 1997 for cattle and 2008 in all forms of animal feed. Radiation does not kill off the prions that cause BSE. The disease has a 10-20 year incubation period in humans and attacks the young most; I wasn't willing to risk it when alternatives were available.
I have no use for organic vegetables, grains, etc. And truthfully, think GMO has been a plus for most of the world's population. The nonsense about modern farm products not containing nutrients is just that.
The only time I find organic useful is in meats and dairy where concentrations of whatever chemicals used in feed and medical treatments are likely to linger in the consumed products. Even then I am usually satisfied with vegetarian fed and no antibiotic labels. I also think grass fed tastes better. I visited a huge dairy a few years ago. The amount of care to keep these farms clean and sanitary is incredible. In order to keep the cows free from illness we could not get off the bus except in the specialized viewing area. The cows are kept in large, free roaming, sand filled open barns that are easily cleaned. The greenies would call it factory farming but it sure looked like the right model.
Posted by: laura | November 19, 2010 at 01:52 PM
Great to "see" Jane!!!
Section 133b, "Authority to Prohibit or Restrict the Movement of Food," sponsored by Congressman Dingell
Something sad about a guy named Dingell telling ANYBODY what they can or cannot do.
Posted by: Janet | November 19, 2010 at 01:52 PM
WOW, cc :)
Trying to make up for all my MO pics!
Posted by: Ann | November 19, 2010 at 01:53 PM
For those who don't want to give Conde Nast, any clicks, on the Kelly piece, in the LUN. Floyd has long shown well she is what she describes
Posted by: narciso | November 19, 2010 at 01:54 PM
Oh brother. Joe Scarborough fessed up that he too had made several campaign contributions, so now he is suspended for two days without pay. ::eyeroll::
They really are like an out of control pre-school over at MSNBC, aren't they?
Posted by: centralcal | November 19, 2010 at 01:54 PM
Etheridge can't overcome Ellmers' lead in recount
WRAL.com Raleigh, NC ^ | 11/18/10 | Bruce Mildwurf
Posted on Fri Nov 19 2010 12:58:41 GMT-0600 (CST) by CodeJockey
Raleigh, N.C. — Republican Renee Ellmers has unseated veteran Congressman Bob Etheridge, according to unofficial results of a recount in the tight race.
Etheridge, a seven-term Democrat, picked up six votes on Ellmers after voting results from 10 counties were tabulated a second time, but it was nowhere near enough to overcome her 1,489-vote lead following the Nov. 2 election.
The State Board of Elections still must audit the results and will meet next Tuesday to certify the results of all elections statewide.
2010 North Carolina General Election Results Etheridge requested a recount after Ellmers led him by less than 1 percent of the 189,800 ballots cast in the Second Congressional District.
Posted by: anduril | November 19, 2010 at 01:55 PM
from Thomas Collins, 01:20 link.
"First Lady Michelle Obama is expected to announce on Monday a major new initiative that would place up to 5,000 salad bars in public schools nationwide, despite uncertainties over how local health inspectors might treat those salad bars and USDA nutrition-tracking rules that could prove a major impediment."
This is insane! Schools are supposed to spend money installing salad bars "despite uncertainties over how local health inspectors --------------------------------------------------------"
Wouldn't you think the average person would solve these problems before putting hard earned money into 5000 salad bars? Oh wait, it's not their money, it's China's.
They don't have any more money. Might as well go ahead and spend like there is no tomorrow.
I'd be willing to bet, a small sum, that a salad bar can not be designed that a health inspector could not find some reason to close it down if he wanted to do so.
Posted by: Pagar | November 19, 2010 at 01:55 PM
So why didn't someone tell me that was old news?
Posted by: anduril | November 19, 2010 at 01:58 PM
Etheridge conceded. Renee Elmers, a lovely tea party gal, won.
Posted by: Clarice | November 19, 2010 at 01:59 PM
Wonder if Scarborough's contributions were to Republicans or Democrats.
Posted by: Extraneus | November 19, 2010 at 02:10 PM
This thread is slow to load today.
Posted by: Clarice | November 19, 2010 at 02:10 PM
Typical liberal thinking that they have a Great! Idea! That'll Solve! The! Problem! Awesomeness! Eleventy! We're just so much smarter than those proles.
The public schools in our area have had salad bars for years. They even have fruit. Now, if they could just find some decent tasting salad dressing...
Posted by: Stephanie | November 19, 2010 at 02:11 PM
I have DennisThePeasant bookmarked and I frequently stop by for a belly fully of jolly vitriol and common sense. Before his blog he haunted the same places as PeterUK and I back in 2004 or so (Totten's blog and whatnot.) PeterUK used to stop by Dennis's blog, probably for the wit but maybe also because they were both blues fans.
Posted by: Jim Ryan | November 19, 2010 at 02:11 PM
Re: Yglesias
Dismissing Ygleasias' premise isn't the hard part: It's not about "persuading" people to work, it's about increasing the number of jobs available, no? I didn't think is was about individual productivity, either. A tax cut looks far more like the equivalent of getting a raise for the work Yglesias is already doing.
I'm not at all sure the Dennis analysis helps the tax cutting cause, however. I understand the issue of independent/dependent variables. Lefty analysis almost universally ignores the economic effect of 9/11, for instance. A commenter at the Yglesias site also points to the exporting of capital as an unacknowledged factor, which could presumably explain the static domestic numbers.
But! The argument for tax cuts has always been that they create more jobs, stimulate investment in small business startups in particular, thereby growing the economy and increasing government revenues. Dennis faults Yglesias' logic, which is never hard to do, but if employment/startup numbers don't bear out the first two claims, that strikes me as a fatal defect in the tax cutters' position. When the right cites increased revenues as proof of the cause & effect pudding, wouldn't Dennis necessarily fault that logic on the same basis he goes after Yglesias/Leonhardt?
It's all very well to say that the equations are far more complex than Leonhardt allows, but as a political issue, that's simply not an effective counterargument. Indeed, if the relevant variables themselves are (and will remain) in constant flux (known knowns to unknown unknowns!), it's hard to see how any sort of predictive model can be defended. Isn't that really the heart of the matter?
Posted by: JM Hanes | November 19, 2010 at 02:14 PM
Extraneus: It gets curiouser and curiouser -
If you read the story, it sounds like when he says "it was brought to my attention," that someone was digging around looking for this info. Hhhmmm - I am thinking K.O.
Posted by: centralcal | November 19, 2010 at 02:15 PM
Some blogger-I think Wiz Bang but I'm not positive --noted that MO's new food regime talked about cutting cheese use in school cafeterias at the same time she and BO scarf it down as much as possible AND as she was handing our=t her "favorite" recipe which had heavy cream and 4 cups of --um--CHEESE--in it.
What a pair of dopes.
Posted by: Clarice | November 19, 2010 at 02:15 PM
Since this is Friday and I begged out of my usual golf game, I went to the Farmer's Market in Flagler Beach. It is there every Friday and especially during the winter with the snow birds it is a big deal. Plus a lot of the produce is locally, organically grown.
I need potatoes, celery, carrots and leeks for the chicken waterzooi I am making. Spoke to one of the truck farmers who has been doing this for 30 years and asked him what he thought of the Senate bill restricting, limiting, outlawing farmer's markets land he told me I was crazy that they would never do anything like that to farmers. Gave me the farm subsidy angle and how the DoA are farmer's friends, etc. He had no idea this bill existed and asked the stand next to him who really looked surprised. I told them they better contact Senator Nelson since I think he voted for it. They didn't look to happy from that point on.
Posted by: Jack is Back! | November 19, 2010 at 02:16 PM
Maybe Jami was on Rocky Maddow's show and advised her that Sarah has an extraordinary ass. Or that Rocky smells like ass.
Posted by: Captain Hate | November 19, 2010 at 02:17 PM
oh, my bad - Politico did the digging!
Posted by: centralcal | November 19, 2010 at 02:17 PM
it sounds like when he says "it was brought to my attention," that someone was digging around looking for this info. Hhhmmm - I am thinking K.O.
Countdown to CentralCal being named THE WORST PERSON IN THE WORLD!!!
Posted by: Captain Hate | November 19, 2010 at 02:19 PM
More from TC's link:
In October, the USDA's Food and Nutrition Services division, which oversees the subsidized meal program, circulated a memo saying that while it encourages the use of salad bars in schools, school menu planners must tell students the minimum amounts they must take from salad bars, cashiers "must be trained to judge accurately the quantities of self-service items," and point-of-sale registers "must be stationed after the salad bar."
Getting shifts of kids in and out of the lunchroom is already a logistical nightmare. Now we're going to have Salad Cops repeatedly stopping the line and redirecting kids to "go back and get more or this or that"..and all with schools forced to cut back on staff and with no hope of hiring more as the transitory Porkulus funds are gone, never to return.
Posted by: DebinNC | November 19, 2010 at 02:21 PM
maybe Princess Shopping Cart can get together with Gavin Newsom and put salad bars (organic, of course) in all of the federal prisons as well.
Posted by: matt | November 19, 2010 at 02:24 PM
school menu planners must tell students the minimum amounts they must take from salad bars
"If you touch my lunch,I'll have you arrested!"
--stuff hit and run jr will say
Posted by: hit and run | November 19, 2010 at 02:32 PM