Tag Archives: economics

Some Economics Numbers

Posted on by
Reply

…from the Tax Foundation, via AEIdeas. First this graph (right-click on it to get a bigger, more readable version):TaxMap_100-Map

The figures are regional price parities of $100 for each of the 50 states, where the national average price is taken as 100. In other words, whereas on average across the whole country, $100 would buy $100 worth of goods, in California those $100 would buy only $89 and change, in Arkansas those $100 would buy a bit over $114 worth of the same goods. The bulk of the differences across the US was driven by relative housing costs: California’s housing, for instance, costs one-third more than the national average while Arkansas’ housing is one-third cheaper.

Mark Perry expanded on these data in his article at the AEIdeas link above, and adjusted per-capita personal income for differences in personal taxes and those price levels. California, based solely on income, ranked 12th in the nation at $48.5k per person. After adjusting for California’s tax bite and pricing, though, the value of a California’s average citizen fell to just $34.8k, dropping California to 37th in the nation the value of that nominal income.

Arkansas, on the other hand, started out 43rd in unadjusted income, with a citizen getting $36.7k. After tax and price level adjustment, though, the state rose to 31st, with that income becoming $35.5k.

There’s something to be said for cost of living and taxes in determining where actual prosperity resides.

Disparate Impact

Posted on by
1

Disparate impact is the racist theory that if practices result in an imbalance (as defined by disparate impact aficionados) in racial representation in this or that arena (see housing, for instance), than the practices must stop until—based solely on race—sufficient races are brought into the arena to achieve an acceptable balance of races. Notice that none of disparate impact has anything to do with the wishes of members of this or that race, already present or absent from the arena. By design, it has nothing to do, also, with the intent of the managers of the arena.

Consider, now, a case brought by

64 organizations alleging that Harvard uses de facto quotas to limit Asian-Americans on campus.

The case was brought to the Civil Rights division of the Department of Education—who promptly dismissed the case, ostensibly because of “pending litigation.” There is a case pending, but as DoE knows full well it’s unlikely to be finally adjudicated for another two or three—or more—years.

Never mind that

Asian-Americans need to score 140 points higher on the SAT than white students to be considered equal applicants on paper, and 450 points higher than African-Americans

and that they’re still underrepresented in Harvard admissions.

Never mind, either, how insulting that 450 point handicap is for blacks–the very group Harvard pretends to be wanting to help.  Or the insult of those 140 points for whites.  But that’s OK, whites have too much privilege; they need to be insulted every now and then.

Apparently, disparate impact is applicable only to certain government-favored groups of Americans. But then, such special treatment is at the very hearts of racism and of bigotry in general.

Welcome to the World at the Top

Posted on by
Reply

This Wall Street Journal article‘s subhead says it all; the article itself just fleshes out the theme.

The Continent’s most powerful country is grappling with its leadership role—and other nations are, too[.]

Welcome to our world. When you’re on top of the heap others are going to be…jealous.

Haters gonna hate.

Pick One

Posted on by
Reply

The PRC’s stock market, such as it is, is continuing to fall, despite the government’s best efforts to intervene. And intervene they must because, as AEI scholar Derek Scissors put it in an interview posted on AEIdeas,

The Chinese government is reacting as if stocks crashing when it doesn’t want them to crash is a personal affront….

Well, alrighty then. And so, of course,

Early Wednesday, the Chinese authorities rushed out another raft of emergency measures to halt what is turning into a crisis of confidence in leaders’ ability to steer the economy.

They didn’t work, either. But the effort is just foolish. It’s possible to have a free market, a vibrant stock market, or a government-run market, but not both.

Let the market run and run its course. The outcome will be better educated, more cautious private investors, especially among the retail investors—guys like Xi from the farm—investors who will act with less irrational exuberance. Continued government interference will only serve to protect the citizenry from themselves, which is to say it will not protect them at all by denying them the opportunity to learn this lesson.

But, of course, the denizens of the Chinese Communist Party Know Better.

Update: Today, the Shanghai Index rose some 200 points, fueled in no small measure by government entities buying stocks and the government’s criminalizing short-selling.  In addition, trading in half the stocks in the Index remain suspended, by the decisions of the companies involved.  How much government persuasion was involved in those decisions is unknown.

We’ll see over the coming days whether these measures have durable effect or if today is an aberration in a continued slide.

Another VA Failure

Posted on by
Reply

An ex-Army scout and Iraq War veteran tried at two separate Veterans Administration clinics to get treatment for his PTSD. Does he actually have PTSD? I’m spring-loaded to believe so, but I don’t know. And neither does this veteran, unless he’s been previously diagnosed. The problem is that he can’t get that treatment, or even a diagnosis and so effective treatment for what medical problem he might really have.

“The VA isn’t taking new patients.” He got that at both of the Georgia clinics he tried. If you follow the link to the video he recorded, the relevant action starts at around 6:45.

The VA isn’t taking new patients. How does that work? It doesn’t work.

VA spokesman James Hutton gave out the usual VA nonsense:

VA staff should have established a full understanding of Mr Dorsey’s medical situation and determined if an appointment was available for him at another location or if he was eligible for the Choice Program and could be seen outside of VA. The message Mr Dorsey was given, as seen on the video, is completely unacceptable and will not be tolerated.

Shoulda, woulda, coulda. Of course the message Dorsey was given is entirely acceptable and fully tolerated by the VA. It’s still going on. Years after the VA’s mistreatment of our veterans was first exposed. Dorsey has indicated that VA Chief of Staff Rob Nabors has “reached out to him and is trying to help resolve his issue.” Great. We’ll see if Nabors, or anyone at the VA delivers. But that’s small potatoes. This sort of thing is far too widespread to be effectively handled by onesies and twosies.

It’s time to disband the VA altogether and use the VA budget as vouchers to our veterans so they can go to the doctors, clinics, and hospitals of their choice—doctors, clinics, and hospitals that actually do, you know, medical work for, umm, patients.