Month: August 2007

More on Poverty and Health Care

I was not the only person looking at the newly released poverty and health care numbers yesterday. A number of labor activists are using it as ammunition in their activities, people are specifically discussing it in the context of Labor Day, although some cynically say that by the time Tuesday arrives, nobody will care until next August.

Before we begin, today’s economic figures show the American economy grew at an annualized rate of 4% in the second quarter — a pretty good number that exceeded expectations, particularly when you consider the housing sector. Speaking of which, BondDad says that won’t last. Nevertheless, new jobless claims “rose unexpectedly.”

For a very dry but extremely well informed commentary, look no further than the Economic Policy Institute. In fact, they found the figures so interesting and important that they followed up their original comments with “Economy’s Gains Fail to Reach Most Workers’ Paychecks” — the short version is in bullet-points near the beginning for those of you who use economic treatises instead of Ambien. These guys make a living looking at figures like this ([deity] bless them!) and then deciding what impact they will have going forward. Maybe that’s why everybody and their dog is quoting them.

Ezra Klein offers us only a single paragraph, but linked to two more lengthy essays. I must admit a little surprise that Mr, Klein did not focus on the health care aspects of the figures released, but there you are. If I may condense Mr. Klein’s brief missive to a single sentence: How bad poverty is in this country depends entirely how low one sets the “poverty line,” and that number is largely arbitrary.

By way of transition, I offer commentary from Alternet, where staff writer Heather Boushey reminds us that the ability to pay for health care is integral to the issue (Yes, Mr. President, we could all go to the emergency room for routine medical care, but that doesn’t change the fact that we can’t afford it). She points out that over 15% of Americans do not have health insurance at all — employer provided, privately purchased, or government subsidized — a record level. That works out to a little more than one out of every 7 people. If you honestly think a flu pandemic or any kind of epidemic is possible, this number should scare the mucus out of you. Don’t forget to look at the chart on page two, particularly the downward-sloping line representing employer-provided coverage. Given that line, it is easy to see why some politicians think requiring most businesses to provide coverage would fix the problem. However, that does nothing to fix the underlying problem that coverage is too expensive in the first place.

Focusing further on the health care issues, we begin with John Sweeney, who believes “In America, No One Should Go Without Health Care”. And he is right. But remember, by and large the problem is not health care, but the ability to pay for it. He tells us “The annual premium cost for a family health plan has close to doubled since 2000, from $6,351 to an astonishing $11,480. Soaring health coverage costs are crippling U.S. companies’ ability to compete internationally….” Almost $1000 per month, just for insurance! Not including co-payments! Certainly not including deductibles! Do you realize that before the recent minimum wage hike, an employer could easily have spent more money insuring an employee than it paid him in wages? Gee, do you think that might be impacting job creation?

Robert Stein has an item up at The Moderate Voice pointing out what I have been telling you for a few years now, that lack of health insurance is part of a middle class health crisis. And to finish the topic, Eliot Spitzer is threatening to sue the Bush Administration over the new SCHIP rules and zero-interest health care loans. Now, I am more familiar than most people with these loans — I used to work in an office that accepted them. They are normally used for elective procedures that are not covered by insurance: plastic surgery; laser hair removal; vision correction surgery. On one hand, “The room for expansion looks ample, as rising deductibles, co-payments and other costs may force more of the nation’s 250 million people with health insurance to finance out-of-pocket expenses for even basic medical care,” but on the other hand “The zero-interest plans are not for everyone. In fact, they are available only to the creditworthy — meaning they offer no help to those among the nation’s 47 million uninsured who are in difficult financial situations.”

In closing: I was going to say something about Katrina, but JurassicPork said it all; Terrorism and Democrats; when FDR said that “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself,” he meant at least in part that the first step in handling any terrifying situation is keeping your wits about you; finishing a little terror trio, interesting “facts” about Bruce Schneier (don’t know who that is? he’s a security expert and author of Beyond Fear; and finally, a little problem with farm subsidies.

“Bah! You call this poverty??”

Well, it’s the end of August, and that means it’s time to consider the latest statistics for poverty in the United States. For the first time since the beginning of the Bush Administration, poverty is down compared to last year. However, if you counted up the number of times words like “but” or “however” were used in the article, you might come away wondering if that was worth mentioning. There are not actually fewer people living in poverty, just a lower percentage of Americans living in poverty; in other words, the poor are still poor and there are just as many of them as last year, it’s just that there are more Americans total. Furthermore, the percentage is still over 12% (just short of one in every 8 people). Another few “howevers”: both the number and percentage of Americans without health insurance is up to record levels; today’s numbers reflect conditions from a year ago, long before most people suspected a mortgage meltdown was on the horizon; and 29 states had median incomes below the national median.

The Washington Post has another round of “buts” and “howevers” to add, charitably calling the report a “mixed picture”. On the first page alone they note that “Although median household income, adjusted for inflation, rose for the second straight year, it has not reached the pre-recession high of 1999,” that increased houshold earnings weren’t because of higher wages — wages dropped by 1% — but rather because more people in the house were working (although apparently the Heritage Foundation chose to overlook that point), that the poorest families had the highest percentage gain (a fifty cent an hour raise is a lot bigger percentage of $6 than of $12), that income inequality is even bigger than last year, that the group for whom poverty decreased was the elderly, and that we still have higher poverty rates than we did during the last recession. Not before, during the recession.

On page 2 of the article, they tackle the health insurance side of the numbers. They do not point out the obvious, that there are more people without insurance than people in poverty — and people living in poverty qualify for insurance programs like Medicaid — which means lack of the ability to pay for medical care is now a huge problem in the middle class. The number and percentage of kids without health insurance grew for the second year in a row to 11.7%. That means pretty much every classroom in our nation has at least a couple uninsured kids on average. On a related note, I’d like to throw in Krugman on the dreaded socialism of schools and health care and The Glittering Eye’s rebuttal (ht to Pete Abel, who highlighted the story in his Center of Attention the other day). Even worse, fewer than 60% of people have employer-provided health insurance at all. This is the most important reason why I feel employer-based insurance is not the answer to our current health insurance crisis, and support at the very minimum a MediKids program, if not full-on Medicare For All.

In the end, these numbers must mean something real, or certain conservatives wouldn’t be arguing things like “but the poor are so much better off now!” with a straight face.

In closing: I’ve been meaning to talk about food and fat for a while, but there’s always something else to talk about, so here’s National obesity rates continue to rise and you can’t blame that on how BMI is calculated, you do have to eat to get flatter abs, diet might be the key to reducing violence, treating mental illness, and raising kids test scores, and so-called convenience foods often don’t save time; yes, Virginia, there are things the government does better than private industry; “The attempt to redefine woman-controlled contraception as “abortion” speaks volumes about both the anti-choice agenda (ban all female control over reproduction) and their understanding that their actual goals are so far to the right that they can’t be spoken out loud.”; this won’t help most of us, but here’s an item on how to fly a private jet for less; and finally, immigration raid on chicken processing plant. Interesting that they went after a relatively small player in the poultry game. Has Tyson cleaned up its act, or is this a political favor?

Cross-posted at Central Sanity.

Ground Breaking Research?

In other news, kittens are cute.

Some Canadian researches have determined that ” Female tutors best for boys’ reading.” More:

Herb Katz, an education professor at the University of Alberta, took 175 boys in the third and fourth grades, identified as struggling readers, and paired them with a research assistant who worked on their reading skills for 30 minutes a week over 10 weeks.On average, the boys paired with female tutors felt better about their reading skills after the 10 weeks than those who were coached by a male research assistant, the study found.

That’s right, Mr. Katz did not actually determine that the boys read better, just that they felt better about their reading skills. Clearly an educational breakthrough. With educational “research” like this, who needs enemies?

In closing: evidence and supply-siders don’t mix; more on the haves and have-nots; more on wiretaps, one and two; the the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has a whole bag of SHHH! for you; Bruce Schneier is right about the importance of emergency communications; that bankruptcy “reform” bill in 2005 screwed today’s subprime mortgage borrowers; I like Mr. Kucinich too; and last, Congress is protecting that pedophile pervert @$$h47 Mark Foley. You remember him? The guy who was propositioning underage Congressional pages for a decade or so? Disgusting.

Have a great weekend!

A Little Message for the College Crowd

Hey guys. I know this is a pretty cool time in your lives: you are legally grown-ups; you are making new friends, some of whom are from wildly different places than you; you are either deciding what you want to do “when you grow up” or actively working towards it; some of you are living on your own — or at least not with mom and dad — for the first time.

Now don’t get me wrong. I know your point of view is very different from mine. I read that list Beliot College makes every fall, even if I think they could have made better points. I was in college when you were born! However, there are some things that don’t change, no matter how much they should change.

And the one biggest thing that hasn’t changed but should is that you will know people who drink too much. Some of those people will do really stupid things as a result. Some of those people will die. Some of them will sadly cause someone else’s death. Some of them will have other horrible results.

There is a very good chance that one of the people you know who will drink too much is you.

Hey, I’m not so old that I don’t know the score. What, you don’t think I drank my share of beer in college? I know. Your friends are drinking and you want to fit in. Or maybe you’re pledging a frat/sorority and hey, you are willing to do whatever the pledge captain says. And for the first time in your life, there’s nobody you have to call and check in with, nobody who will care if you don’t drag your butt into bed before 3 AM if at all. You control your own schedule — except for that one 8 AM class that you had to take — and you are responsible for your own decisions. Nobody is blaming you for saying “I can have a beer if I want to, and nobody is going to stop me!”

I’m not going to put on the holier than thou and talk about how the legal drinking age is still 21. That notwithstanding, you’re legally an adult at 18, and entitled to make your own decisions, no matter how stupid. Nor am I going to preach about drunk driving. If those gory films in driver’s education didn’t persuade you that it’s a bad idea that can get you arrested or get you into a horrible wreck, nothing I can say is going to change your mind.

What I am going to say is to please use your head. Moderation is a good thing. Unlike that casserole your mom used to make, there is no rule that says you have to finish that mug of beer or bottle of hard liquor. It’s ok to not “have seconds,” let alone thirds and beyond. It’s ok to say “I’m fine, maybe I’ll have another one later.” You can use that 8 AM class or your job — it turns out over half of you have at least part time jobs, good for you! — as a perfectly valid excuse for why you won’t be having another drink. Do you honestly think your Dad has never said something like “Sorry guys, I’d better not have another. Gotta work in the morning”?

Please. Don’t be the guy who made the papers by dying of alcohol poisoning. Or the girl who wrapped her car around a telephone pole and killed her best friend. Or the guy who fell down the stairs and broke his leg, but didn’t notice until he tried to walk away. Or the girl who woke up with no underwear and no memory of the prior evening. Or the guy who woke up with some girl he doesn’t even know. Or the girl whose friends and family are begging her to get help, at least go to an AA meeting. Or the guy who is flunking all his classes because he spends too much time drunk and not enough time studying.

These things happen every year on college campuses across our nation.

Please, don’t let it be you.

****

This has been my personal message to all the college students of the world. Please feel free to send a link to this article to friends, family, and other people you care about. If you choose to forward the text instead, please note that it is written by Bridget Magnus of ShortWoman.com and Central Sanity, all rights reserved by the author.

Mortgage Carnage Round-Up

Before I get going, I’d like to let people know that until August 25, you can log your opinion about the focus for BlogHer’s Global Health initiative. You do not need to be a member to vote. But on to the round-up!

Barbara Ehrenreich starts the show with “Smashing Capitalism”, in which she amusingly shows us signs of the poor leading a revolution by not paying their mortgages and then failing to go shopping. At least at Wal-Mart. Somehow, Target is doing just fine thank you very much.

Speaking of mortgages, foreclosures are up 9% month-over-month and almost double year-over-year. the All Spin Zone says “duh.” Democrats are falling over themselves trying to propose solutions. Here’s a creative answer, converting foreclosures to “own to rent” contracts. I’m not sure it would work — state laws are in play — but it’s interesting.

Fed action is probably not enough to make the problems go away. And that is not just because Mr. Bernanke cannot wave a magic wand and cause thousands of homeowners to have enough money to pay the mortgage. It’s because the market for “commercial paper” — buying and selling bonds, mortgages, and other debts — is broken. And don’t get to thinking “oh boo hoo for the rich fat cats who trade that stuff!” The paper doesn’t trade as it should, so new money for new loans does not exist. That includes the new loan for equipment at your workplace that would mean adding people to the payroll to run it. That includes the refinanced mortgage on Joe and Jane Average’s place.

And that brings us to the Wall Street side of the problem. Jim Cramer arrives fashionably late to the party with advice “Don’t Buy Fannie Mae!” Really, Jim? Thanks, but I think a lot of us had figured that one out. Then we have Dave Johnson, who points out that “The unwinding of the housing bubble takes us way beyond mortgages and into the financial markets of Wall Street.” Speaking of which, investors flush a half a Trillion with a T dollars to bail out just one bond and loan fund. Does that give you an idea how big this problem could be? And coming full circle, the BondDad points out that a lot of real human beings who work in the financial services industry — Americans with mortgages of their own to pay — are going to lose their jobs before all is said and done.

As usual, I will watch the job “creation” numbers with interest when they come out.

In closing: reader Jukkou-san sent World Clock; amazingly enough the strangest thing you will ever read about Karl Rove, even if it is about his dad; it’s still the economy, stupid; George Lakoff seems to think that Centrist really means someone who is willing to pretend that cutting the baby in half makes everyone happy, and he is wrong; Steven Levitt on how things have changed in the beverage world; must read item on the United Nations Population Fund and the anti-contraceptive nuts who want to undermine them; the USDA, organic food, and you; I don’t know what to make of the Daily Show’s Iraq correspondent; Bill Nye booed for telling the truth about the moon…. wait for it…. in Waco; Daily Kos is late to the impeach Gonzo party; oh no! “Immigration crackdown threatens bumper U.S. apple harvest” and farmers may actually have to pay American citizens to pick apples!; so you want a DeLorean; sorry, Senators, you don’t get to pick the leader of a sovereign nation.

And finally, a bit of follow up from Friday Follow-up’s paragraph on Real ID. When it came up on David Farber’s Interesting People list, I offered the only reply, nothing I didn’t say before, but:

I read the CNN article about Real ID yesterday, and found it interesting. First, they point out that some Americans would need a passport “to have a picnic in a national park.” While that is an interesting issue, “for all federal purposes” means those same Americans would also need a passport to do business in person with other federal entities such as the Social Security Administration offices, federal courthouses, and IRS offices. Will they need a passport to pick up a registered letter at the Post Office? I sincerely hope there is not an impending catch-22 with the State Department, since strictly speaking one should need a Real ID compliant card to get a passport. All these things seem much more important than “a picnic in a national park” to me.

Second, why is CNN suddenly on about a law passed 2 years ago?

Corrente offered an interesting commentary called “When internal passport controls go into effect, will DHS “Behavior Detection Officers” profile us like DEA does now?” And more, alert the media, Bruce Schneier said something that shows he doesn’t get it: “This sounds tough, but it’s a lot of bluster. The states that have passed anti-REAL-ID legislation lean both Republican and Democrat. The federal government just can’t say that citizens of — for example — Georgia (which passed a bill in May authorizing the Governor to delay implementation of REAL ID) can’t walk into a federal courthouse without a passport. Or can’t board an airplane without a passport — imagine the lobbying by Delta Airlines here. They just can’t.” Sorry, Mr. Schneier. They already did. They can and did specify using a federally approved ID for federal purposes. If Congress can’t get its act together and get this thing repealed, our only hope is that some judge will realize it impairs citizen’s First Amendment right to seek redress in the courts.

Follow-up Friday on a Thursday

Remember Postcards from Africa? Well now “CARE, one of the world’s biggest charities, is walking away from about $45 million a year in federal funding, saying American food aid is not only plagued with inefficiencies, but may hurt some of the very poor people it aims to help.”

I’ve written about Jose Padilla a number of times, but now that the verdict has come out, it is worth reading the Christian Science Monitor’s pre-sentencing thoughts and Andrew Sullivan’s initial observations, which he cautions are all he’s willing to say until he’s read some of the legal documents involved.

New research says fat is critical in a child’s diet, a fact which supports the story I pointed out last week about how “diet” foods aren’t good for kids. Elsewhere, we find that fat may not really be that bad for adults, either, when they eat it the way they would have eaten it tens of thousands of years ago. Maybe. The jury is still out on this one, and anecdotally, the fellow who went on the “all meat” diet described in the second page doesn’t seem to healthy to me, despite his claims that it was the broccoli he was forced to eat as a child that caused his problem.

It’s hard to seem like Joe Average common sense middle America while riding on Daddy’s yacht. He does look happy, though. You’d never know his approval ratings were so dismal. And you know, for an old guy, Bush 41 has some nice abs there. Maybe there’s something to not eating broccoli after all.

This isn’t following up on anything, really, but here’s OpenLeft’s First BlogPac Progressive Entrepreneurs Contest Winners. If you see something you are in a position to support, you will figure out what to do.

This week, judges have been hearing arguments on a lawsuit by AT&T customers against NSA warrantless wiretapping. I just love some of the comments and questions from the judges, including “Who decides whether something is a state secret or not?”, “What does ‘ultimate deference’ mean? Bow to it?”, and “Every ampersand, every comma is top-secret?”

Remember that US Attorney firing scandal? The one that Harriet Miers and later Karl Rove himself were ordered not to testify before Congress about? ABC News suspects it’s bigger than we now know.

As mortgage woes progress, we will see more Country Forclosures and City Forclosures.

Sometimes I don’t agree with Michael van der Galien, but when it comes to immigration we are on the same page:

This has nothing to do with racism, it is all about something called the Rule of Law. When people break the law they should be punished, it is that simple. One can migrate to America legally – if one chooses to move to America illegally it seems logical and fitting for one to be punished. Not only should the person who lives in America illegally be punished, those who make it possible for him or her to do so should be punished as well.

If there are roadblocks preventing hard-working, honest people from legally immigrating to this country, let’s fix it. But that’s not the issue; the issue is people who come here illegally and the people who hire them, also illegally.

I wonder why a law passed in 2005 was a CNN top story today? Hmm. They point out that “Americans may need passports to board domestic flights or to picnic in a national park next year if they live in one of the states defying the federal Real ID Act,” but neglect to mention that they would also need a passport to get into a federal building such as a courthouse, Social Security office, or IRS office. You see, I think that’s more important than having a picnic in a national park, personally. “Chertoff said the Real ID program is essential to national security because there are presently 8,000 types of identification accepted to enter the United States,” but what does that have to do with the movements of American citizens? Since when are people presenting “baptismal certificates from small towns in Texas” to get into Yellowstone? Chertoff also told the states “There’s going to be an irreducible expense that falls on you, and that’s part of the shared responsibility,” or suck it up. They go on to mention that “Applicants must bring a photo ID, birth certificate, proof of Social Security number and proof of residence, and states must maintain and protect massive databases housing the information,” but neglect to mention that anybody who does not go by the name on their birth certificate would need documents to support their current name. That means the overwhelming majority of married women will have to bring their marriage certificates to the DMV. Thankfully they will not have to bring a male relative too. Speaking of the DMV, CNN also fails to mention that increased load for the DMV will almost certainly mean longer lines and more waiting. But I love most these paragraphs near the end:

But, [Bill] Walsh [senior legal fellow for the Heritage Foundation] said, “any state that’s refusing to implement this key recommendation by the 9/11 Commission, and whose state driver’s licenses are as a result used in another terrorist attack, should be held responsible.” [snip]

Chertoff said there would be repercussions for states choosing not to comply.

“This is not a mandate,” Chertoff said. “A state doesn’t have to do this, but if the state doesn’t have — at the end of the day, at the end of the deadline — Real ID-compliant licenses then the state cannot expect that those licenses will be accepted for federal purposes.”

Or, you don’t have to, but then your citizens are screwed, and if there is a terrorist attack it will be all your fault!

And one last thing, about the TSA program to identify Bad Guys based on what they do; I can proudly say my opinion has not changed.

Mandatory Reading

If you are a human being, you have been in a relationship with another human being at some point in your life. Indeed, you are highly likely to have a relationship with another human being in the future.

You know people who are also human. Some of them are men; some of them are women. They also have relationships with other human beings.

And some of those relationships have something horribly wrong in them.

And that is why I am asking you to read this item on BlogHer entitled “Are you in an abusive relationship? How domestic violence touches us all.” Please, read it with an open mind, look at some of the links, and if you see anything that raises red flags in your life or the life of someone you know, read some more so you will know what to do.

That is all.

Oh wait, no, in closing 3 forces behind a market crash, economic blunders in post-Saddam Iraq, One Million Dead Iraqis in post-Saddam Iraq and counting, if we really have a shortage of tech workers how come wages for tech workers haven’t gone up? and finally, I kid you not, Extreme Ironing. Yes, that person carried an ironing board to the top of a semi-active volcano. To do some ironing. Some stuff you can’t make up.

Economy-Filter

Today I offer a quartet of items on the economy, granted skewed a bit “left.” Sorry, most of the “right” thinks there’s very little wrong with the economy. And I suppose as long as you don’t look at job creation too carefully, and ignore the number of people living in poverty (new figures on that coming out towards the end of the month, we’ll see if that number continues to go up), and don’t look at the number of people with no/inadequate health insurance when you talk about high total health care costs, and don’t wonder how prices of gold and other commodities can be this high with an official inflation number this low, and don’t wonder how corporate profits can continue to grow at a rate that dwarfs both inflation and GDP growth, the economy does look pretty good.

I was going to write about the sub-prime mess and how we got here, but Amanda Marcotte at Pandagon did a very nice short version of the problem so I will not reinvent the wheel. Adjustable Rate Mortgages are not the whole problem, even though I have been begging readers to refinance them for some time now; ARMs have their place (I even had one back in ’96, when it was clear that interest rates were going down).

The truth is there are two parts to this problem, one on the demand side and one on the supply side. As for the supply side, Ms. Marcotte pretty much nailed it: mortgage brokers wrote paper for people who really couldn’t afford it long term; the mortgage brokers didn’t care, because they were planning on turning around and selling the mortgage; if the homeowner was smart enough to realize he/she needed to refinance, their friendly mortgage broker gets to rinse and repeat; if not then the default is Somebody Else’s Problem. It is worth noting that “somebody else” could well be Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

That in turn brings me to Tim Iocono at The Mess That Greenspan Made, who lets us in on the secret that Freddie and Fannie are in no shape to bail out the system. Indeed they helped cause the problem, and are in need of “reform.”

More than hints and allegations, on the demand side of the equation, we have Ownership Society propaganda from a variety of sources including the White House — which specifically considers widespread home-ownership a goal. The head of the Cato Institute actually said “Seriously, [the Ownership Society] should be an emotional issue about liberty and opportunity, not solvency dates.” Forgive me, the biggest investment most Americans will ever make should not be “an emotional issue.” At times even Fannie Mae has been actively advertising the idea that everyone should own a house.* The Washington Post adds “The result has been a range of policies that promote homeownership while generally neglecting renters.”

I would like to specifically spell out the implication: the “housing bubble” and the sub-prime mess are two sides of one coin; without one, the other would not exist. Reduced mortgage standards and “alternative mortgage products” that reduce monthly payments allowed the customers who demanded them to spend way too much on a house. Without these products, buyers could not have paid inflated prices, and would have to save up an appropriate down-payment. Since saving money takes time (and the savings rate in this country has been lousy in recent years), this would have reduced the number of potential purchasers. The combination of fewer buyers and a lower number on the pre-approval letter means sellers would have had to accept reduced offers — or of course choose not to sell.

* There are a number of reasons why a purchased home might not be the right choice for any particular person/family. These reasons include but are not limited to financial instability, familial instability, likelihood of moving within 2 years, lack of interest/skill in home-maintenance, and known future lifestyle changes (having kids, kids moving away, retirement, etc.).

It really was the economy, stupid, might have been the alternate title for Hale Stewart’s article, Why Clinton’s Economy Was Better. I seriously do not know where this guy finds time to write as much as he does. But nevertheless I’m glad he does. Oh my and his charts bring joy to my inner technical analyst! Hmm where was I? Oh, right, Clinton.

Ultra-short version of the article is that by eliminating the budget deficit and starting to pay down the national debt, President Clinton forced investors out of US government bonds and into the stock market. This not only created investor confidence, it provided the capitalization to create good paying jobs. Mr. Clinton’s job creation and unemployment rate numbers are also remarkable when you consider that the Welfare Reform bill of 1996 put thousands more people into the workforce.

The goal of a balanced federal budget is a conservative ideal I can support. We now have anecdotal evidence that it is good for all sectors of the economy. It may not be the right thing in all times — Mr. Bush’s Trifecta of “recession, war, or a national emergency” comes to mind — but under normal circumstances it is a good idea to not spend more money than you have.

And to complete the symphony, we have the Left’s favorite economist, Paul Krugman, and his commentary Why Economists Are Jittery about the Stock Market. Sometimes it is difficult to read things by even the most dynamic of economists; if you can only manage one paragraph or two:

What’s been happening in financial markets over the past few days is something that truly scares monetary economists: liquidity has dried up. That is, markets in stuff that is normally traded all the time — in particular, financial instruments backed by home mortgages — have shut down because there are no buyers.This could turn out to be nothing more than a brief scare. At worst, however, it could cause a chain reaction of debt defaults.

Nor are mortgage-backed securities the only paper that until last week was “normally traded all the time.” Another victim/culprit is “high-yield corporate debt, a k a junk bonds.” Remember junk bonds? Remember what the 80s?

So Mr. Krugman is saying that if nobody is willing to buy these securities, nobody will be able to sell them. If they can’t be sold, the people who own them will have a hard time paying other financial obligations or making new investments. That, in turn, means more defaults and fewer available investment dollars — both of which are bad for both the markets and the economy at large.

If all these items had a central theme, it would be that “too much debt” and “too little cash and cash equivalents” are problems both on a microeconomic and macroeconomic level. It does not matter whether you are Joe Average, a small business, a large publicly traded company, or even the government.

To the Health and Well-Being of Adults, Children, and Cute Fuzzy Animals

Sometimes it takes the BBC to tell us the bleeding obvious: “Too much food, alcohol and sun has fuelled a massive rise in some forms of cancer, warn UK experts.” They’re British, so save the pedantic comments about spelling. There’s a lot to be said for “Moderation in all things.” Now, science confirms it!

Speaking of too much food, a new study suggests that feeding lots of “diet” foods to kids may cause overeating as adults. The working theory is that they “are conditioned to associate certain tastes – be they sweet or salty – with low-calorie foods, [so] they will begin to overeat at later meals to compensate, even if the sweet and salty treats are calorie-rich.” But by the time puberty is reached, “they likely used other cues, such as texture and portion size, to determine more correct calorie intake.” Granted, the research in question was done in rats, but in an age where we are becoming increasingly concerned about childhood obesity rates, this research may mean rethinking weight control for kids. The scientist in charge of the research concluded “Use nutritious, healthy food with calories and make sure the calories are balanced to the amount of activity level of the children.”

Of course I think we are all better off eating “nutritious, healthy food with calories” as opposed to the chemistry experiments that allow us to eat “low calorie” versions of cookies, candy, and high fat/sugar things.

And as for Cute Fuzzy Animals, today I received an email. I don’t normally forward such things, but I have verified this particular story via Snopes:

Hi, all you animal lovers. This is pretty simple… Please tell ten friends to tell ten today! The Animal Rescue Site is having trouble getting enough people to click on it daily to meet their quota of getting free food donated every day to abused and neglected animals.It takes less than a minute (How about 20 seconds) [actually it takes about 5 seconds, I tried it] to go to their site and click on the purple box “fund food for animals” for free. This doesn’t cost you a thing.

Their corporate sponsors/advertisers use the number of daily visits to donate food to abandoned/neglected animals in exchange for advertising.

Here’s the web site! Pass it along to people you know.

http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/

AGAIN, PLEASE TELL 10 FRIENDS

Snopes points out that CharityUSA runs a family of sites that allow you to “donate” money for free by clicking a simple link, in addition to several online stores that allow you to both give money and show your charitable pride.

If you want to tell 10 people, that’s fine. If you’d rather put this information on your own site, that’s even better. But in any event, get clicking!

In closing: Bush 41, proud father?; if the economy is so great, how come fewer Mexican workers in the United States are sending money home; the CSM reports that experts say if you want to fly and get there on time, it will cost you extra; the new environmentalists on the block, Christian Evangelicals; a HUGE new planet has been found; and finally, Support Our Constitution.