Friday, February 16th, 2007,
by Fred (,
economics, me, politics
,
Internet staleness disclaimer - yes, I know that the link is old (1995), but Yglesias and Drezner both linked it, so…
The Pew Typology Test says I’m an “Enterpriser”
Enterpriser
Based on your answers to the questionnaire, you most closely resemble survey respondents within the Enterpriser typology group. This does not mean that you necessarily fit every group characteristic or agree with the group on all issues.
Enterprisers represent 9 percent of the American public, and 10 percent of registered voters.
Basic Description
As in previous studies conducted in 1987, 1994 and 1999, this extremely partisan Republican group’s politics are driven by a belief in the free enterprise system and social values that reflect a conservative agenda. Enterprisers are also the strongest backers of an assertive foreign policy, which includes nearly unanimous support for the war in Iraq and strong support for such anti-terrorism efforts as the Patriot Act.
Defining Values
Assertive on foreign policy and patriotic; anti-regulation and pro-business; very little support for government help to the poor; strong belief that individuals are responsible for their own well being. Conservative on social issues such as gay marriage, but not much more religious than the nation as a whole. Very satisfied with personal financial situation.
Who They Are
Predominantly white (91%), male (76%) and financially well-off (62% have household incomes of at least $50,000, compared with 40% nationwide). Nearly half (46%) have a college degree, and 77% are married. Nearly a quarter (23%) are themselves military veterans. Only 10% are under age 30.
All more or less OK, except for the “conservative on social issues bit.” Which is a bit odd, given that I said gay lifestyles should be accepted, not discouraged. The test is based on dichotomies that are almost all flawed. For example, Business corporations make too much profit vs. Most corporations make a fair and reasonable amount of profit. I don’t think fair or reasonable have any place in a discussion of profits of a private enterprise.
Share This
Wednesday, February 14th, 2007,
by Fred (,
competition, economics, government, mitsubishi, toyota
,
Don Surber points to a potential “War on Toyota” and asks whether the government is punishing winners. Of course they are - that’s what governments do. Can’t compete in the marketplace? Get the government to beat down your competitors. Never mind that the Big 3 are still stuck in a buck-a-gallon mindset in which relying on big SUVs and light trucks was a good idea. It couldn’t be that Toyota makes products that people want at a price the market considers reasonable.
A commenter at Don’s site claims that Toyota got where it is by dumping goods in the US at “less than the price of manufacture” and relying on Japanese subsidies. I don’t buy it . Dumping claims are often a refuge for scoundrels - after all, no one can sell below cost for long, and such claims are thus mostly a plea for protectionism. Besides, if it’s unfair competition and government that got Toyota where it is, how do you explain Mitsubishi?
Share This
Monday, April 10th, 2006,
by Fred (,
economics, France, politics
,
What a surprise. The French government surrendered. Congratulations on your victory, French youth. Now you are free to continue suckling on the government teat rather than having to actually go to a job for an employer that expects (a) for you to be competent and (b) to be able to fire you if you are not.
Employers, meanwhile, will continue to flee France for countries that have rational labor laws.
Share This
Friday, April 7th, 2006,
by Fred (,
economics, France, politics
,
The Post-Dispatch gets it on the French protests
Nearly a quarter of France’s young people are out of work. Yet millions of them took to the streets this month to protest a new law that might actually produce jobs for them.The French, it seems, would rather not work at all than work like Americans. Or Chinese, or Poles, or Mexicans for that matter….
Most French workers enjoy something close to lifetime job security — a fast-disappearing anachronism in today’s global economy. Once hired for most jobs, it’s next to impossible to get fired. If they are let go, booted workers can appeal to the government for reinstatement. Companies must give three months’ notice of layoffs, pay fines and provide severance benefits for up to three years.
So, faced with the high cost of firing people, French employers are reluctant to hire. A hiring mistake could hang around smoking Gauloises and gossiping in the hallway for 40 years. Thus the French unemployment rate of nearly 10 percent, double that in the United States. For French young people who haven’t yet elbowed their way onto the job gravy train, unemployment is 24 percent, compared to 11 percent among young Americans aged 16 to 24. For restive minority youth in France, mainly those of Arab descent, the joblessness rate is close to a whopping 50 percent.
Exactly. Why more people don’t get that oppressive labor laws cause employers not to hire at all remains beyond me. Apparently, it is better not to have a job at all than to have one that you might lose if you are incompetent. The French youth might not have that attitude if they didn’t also have the assurance that the state would take care of them if they are not working. But that’s a battle (to the barricades, gentlemen!) for another day.
The question the Post doesn’t address is why anyone should have employment for life. De Villepin’s proposal would still hog-tie employers by preventing them from firing workers over age 26 or those on the job more than two years. Economic freedom should mean that employers can fire the incompetent. If France doesn’t address this systemic flaw, it will continue to lose ground to the US, China and other economic powers that understand economics.
Share This
Thursday, April 6th, 2006,
by Fred (,
economics, Kirkwood, Missouri, taxes
,
Kirkwood mayor proposes sales, property tax hikes
The mayor proposes that voters approve a sales tax of one-fourth of 1 percent for the fire department and a property-tax increase of 17 cents for each $100 of assessed value for the police department.Each would raise about $1 million, the mayor said on Monday. Each department would receive a minimum of $500,000 in additional money, he said. The remainder would replace general fund money spent on those departments and free the revenue for other municipal uses.
The two taxes would be separate proposals on the ballot. Swoboda said they could go before voters in the August primary election or in the election in April of next year.
The changes amount to a 3.5% increase in the sales tax and a 35.7% increase in the Kirkwood portion of the property tax. The property tax increase will be 2.6% of the total property tax bill (including the myriad county taxes). Kirkwood residents are loathe to approve new taxes, havign rejected a 34 cent increase in the property tax in 2004.
It appears that Kirkwood has taken some steps to reduce spending, and residents are likely to respond to requests for additional funds for public safety. But what purpose did the “community development director” and her secretary serve? What other unnecessary spending can be cut? This remains a city with a $15.9 million General Fund budget for 27,000 residents. Compare this with the nearby city of Webster Groves, which spends $12.2 million for its 23,000 residents (Kirkwood budget, Webster Groves budget). Were Kirkwood to spend at the rate Webster does, it could save well over $1 million each year.
Governments should tax as little and spend as little as possible, even at the local level.
Share This
Tuesday, April 4th, 2006,
by Fred (,
CAFE, economics, government, regulation
,
The Post-Dispatch, which never saw a problem that couldn’t be solved with more government, takes on the President for not raising light truck CAFE standards enough
Not only are the mileage standards not as high as they could be, but they also exclude popular styles such as pickup trucks. Worse, the new standards exempt light trucks from the so-called gas-guzzler tax, which is imposed on vehicles that fail to meet mileage standards. Buyers of some models of cars have to pay the tax even though their cars get better mileage than the light trucks that were exempted. That could encourage truck sales at the expense of more fuel-efficient cars.
The President’s plan raises the standards from 22.2 mpg to 24 mpg over four years. According to the Congressional Budget Office, an increase in CAFE standards of 3.8 mpg would cost the US economy $3.6 billion per year. You won’t, however, see any discussion of cost in the Post’s editorial. Apparently, we just pick the money from the money tree.
The market is already able to deal with fuel economy, if dealing with fuel economy is necessary. Rising gas prices are likely to reduce demand for gas guzzlers. If consumers demand more economical choices, manufacturers will provide them. Government mandates and new taxes are not the answer.
Share This
Monday, March 20th, 2006,
by Fred (,
economics, nanny state, smoking
,
The CDC says that “smoking cost the nation about $92 billion in the form of lost productivity in 1997-2001.” Anti-smoking nannies claim that “secondhand smoke costs the U.S. economy roughly $10 billion a year: $5 billion in estimated medical costs associated with secondhand smoke exposure, and another $4.6 billion in lost wages.” Fast food and overeating? $115 billion. Alcohol? $185 billion. Meat eating? $61 billion according to one bunch of carnivore-haters, or $1 trillion according to one lone psycho. Keept that up, and pretty soon you’re talking about real money.
How much money? The Register knows.
We come up with a grand total of $7.39 trillion - well in excess of the $6.70 trillion that actually exists. That’s right, when you allow for the basic costs that we’ve all got to put up with, and the inevitable losses to criminals like Ken Lay and Ted Bundy, and then pile on the items that meddling little turds hate to see us enjoying, it all costs more money than there is.
[via the Meddling Little Turd fighters at the Consumerist]
Share This
Friday, March 10th, 2006,
by Fred (,
economics, Show Me Institute, St. Louis, taxes
,
As noted here a couple of days ago, a new study has found that St. Louis’ earnings tax has been partly responsible for the flight of residents and jobs to the suburbs. Now David Nicklaus notes that St. Louis has placed itself in a vicious cycle in which it may not be able to eliminate the tax:
The property tax is the biggest money-raiser for many other cities, and some theorists consider it the ideal funding source for local government.
“Property taxes in general are considered to be less distortionary than other taxes,†said Patrick Fleenor, chief economist at the Tax Foundation in Washington. “It’s harder for people to avoid.â€
But St. Louis has set up a big barrier to increasing its property-tax take: For decades, nearly every project built in the city has received either tax abatement or tax-increment financing.
That’s partly because the city has been desperate for any investment in an era when residents and businesses were fleeing. The flight is due in part to the earnings tax. But tax abatement makes the earnings tax more important in the city’s revenue picture.
That’s the inherent problem with high taxes - St. Louis put itself in a bad position by taxing earnings of workers and the businesses that employ them. Then, when the residents and businesses fled to the low-tax suburbs, the city used tax gimmickry to attract development. Now the city is hamstrung by the tax gimmickry in its attempt to get rid of the tax that caused the problem in the first place. Far better to (a) spend less and (b) avoid TIFs and tax abatement that distort financial incentives and the revenue base of the city. Unfortunately, is it too late already?
Share This
Wednesday, March 8th, 2006,
by Fred (,
economics, politics, Show Me Institute, St. Louis, taxes
,
There’s something amiss in Target-land, at least in the cookware department:
Exhibit 1: Monkey Full Bedskirt
Exhibit 2: Dragonfly Stained Glass Fireplace Screen
Exhibit 3: Chenille Throw
Exhibit Last: Swimmingly Purple Art Box
They’ll fix it eventually. But it’s funny. For what it’s worth, this is the real Swimmingly Purple Art Box. And the real Dragonfly Stained Glass Fireplace Screen. The real Chenille Throw is now a wall clock:
[via Consumerist]
Share This
