Sunday 3/30/14 Musings

We use a lot of limes in our house and have noticed how the price has ratcheted higher over the last few months.  Today, I read an article about how disease and unfortunate weather when Mexican lime trees were blossoming created the shortage.  Also, demand has picked up substantially over the years, so the supply shortage shows that the basic supply/demand curve has a fair degree of inelasticity in it.  In other words, buyers pay up rather than not purchase limes or switch to other citrus.

Timothy Egan discussed how scientists have known for decades that strip logging certain types of hills creates the conditions that can lead to mudslides.  It is disingenuous for political leaders to say they had no way of knowing a mud slide could happen.  The science was there to say it could happen, but there is no science to say when it will happen.  People make decisions all the time to risk their home and life to a natural disaster.  The state cannot tell them to not do that.  But then these people cannot blame the state when something bad happens.  And they should not look to the rest of us for some compensation for their loss of home.  That is what is happening with flood insurance and we cannot fix it for the same reason we cannot have prudent gun control.  Homeowners who benefit from Federal subsidized flood insurance can swing elections so politicians with beaches in their district refuse to sanction fully priced flood insurance.

What I keep thinking is that science denial is mostly about greed and a desire to brave the unknown odds in the belief either (i) that the government will provide a FEMA safety net or (ii) the voter will win the game during their lifetime and the price will be paid by a subsequent generation, so it is their problem, not the voter's.

Ross Douthat once again wrote about religion and how people feel about state provided benefits vs church provided benefits.  I don't see society that way, even though Douthat assumes as a securlarist  that I think state provided benefits are better.  This is a chicken and an egg discussion.  My religiousness, or lack thereof, did not start with one iota of thought about how I will get services.

I decided upon my beliefs independently long before I had any awareness about a social safety net (age 16 or 17).  Douthat thinks that a safety net was part and parcel of my thought process.  What I think about a social safety net, comes from an examination of reality and hard evidence that it is necessary for a state to provide a social safety net in this modern industrial world.  We cannot go back to the world of some ideal that never existed, poor people died early all the time in that world, and for Douthat to think we should be fighting in politics for this ideal that only existed in selected ways and never supported 100% of the population, just shows how even thoughtful Republicans can simply be wrong.  We need social policies that work for all.

Surprise, American's Want a Free Lunch

The AP wrote an article about how a majority of American's don't like ObamaCare and the main reason is the requirement that everybody buy health insurance.  Even if they want to have health insurance, they dislike the idea of forcing someone to buy it.  However, when asked if they think every drive should have car insurance, they say yes because they know the uninsured driver might hit them.

But continuing with the Poll, it also turns out that American's want to keep the ability of people with pre-existing conditions to buy affordable health insurance.  Well, anyone with an ounce of intelligence, knows that opens up the health insurance companies to the real potential cost of healthy people waiting until they are sick to buy health insurance.  And if that happens, the insurance companies can no longer afford to price health insurance at affordable prices.

I know this because this what NY State had before ObamaCare.  An individual policy cost $1,500 a month because there was no requirement for people to buy health insurance and there was no ability of the health insurance company to turn away people with pre-existing condition.  $1,500 a month is $18,000 a year for a single person and $36,000 for a married couple.  Add some more on for the kid or two and you have priced health insurance in the individual market out of the reach of anyone earning less than $100,000 or even more perhaps.  Remember, all these payments are made with after-tax $.

So when the GOP tells voters you can keep your requirement of insurance availability for pre-existing conditions, but we can do away with the requirement that everyone have health insurance, they are not telling the truth.  And, in fact, they are making it harder for themselves to come up with anything that is viable as a replacement for Heritage Foundation/RomneyCare/ObamaCare.

What they are doing is pandering to the American voter's unending desire and belief that they can have a free lunch.  This is what Bush II did when he passed Medicare Pharmacy Coverage without paying for it, when he cut taxes and started 2 wars without paying for them, and when he cut funding for regulators and we got rampant fraud in the housing finance market and a near depression when it collapse.  The fiscally conservative GOP is no better than the Democrats when it comes to free lunch pandering; but at least the Democrats try to pay for it with revenues.

Both Democrats and Republicans need to be telling voters that there is no free lunch.  One way or another, the economics of everything have to work at all times.

Link to AP Story Summary on Politico

I am World Class

No, not as a blogger, although I like to think I am more thoughtful and balanced then many of those whose sights get thousands of hits.

I am a World Class iPhone Solitaire player.  Not as a scorer because scoring rewards speed and you have to be kid with really nimble thumb technique to world class as a scorer.  But I am in fewest moves.  When I win a game, I estimate I have a 20% chance of being in the top 10 fewest moves.  Usually only 1 to 3 moves separate people in the top 10 and I can be anywhere on the list, including first.  And sometimes I am the fewest by as much as 3 or 4 which I think means I found the most efficient possible way to a win in those case.  And sometimes I am not even on the list being 10 back of the leader, which shows how tough it is to get on the list.

I can tell from the other names on the list that people all over the world are playing this game and that  is the quantifiable basis on which I proclaim I am World Class.

And playing solitaire on the iPhone in competition with players all over the world sure beats being angry about the nonsense the GOP spews out to rile up their base and try to take over the Congress in a low turnout election.  I have no control over any turnout other than my own and I live in NY, so even that won't make much difference.  Maybe we should move to Virginia, but RSL wants nothing to do with the place other than visit her sister and bring home garden produce.  Our turnout would matter in Virginia.

Creationism vs Science

Part and Parcel of science denial has been an expansion in non-public schools of teaching creationism  as opposed to evolution.  These creationists shrink the history of the earth to 10,000 years and deny the validity of the science that the earth and the universe are 4.5 bn and 13 bn years old.

I will admit I have no idea where the material in the Big Bang came from.  I have an MBA from the University of Chicago, have always been interested in science, but do not understand physics.  But I do trust that electricity works, that we can shoot a rocket into space and send a satellite where we want to, and numerous other scientific facts seem to pan out in the real world.  So at some point, you say, science tells us the truth and we accept it.

My reason for this blog is that Politico found out that public dollars are being used to pay for kids to attend private schools that teach creationism and claim that the science of evolution is wrong.  If evolution is wrong, don't you think the bible would have mentioned dinosaurs?  or woolly mammoths?  Don't you think Noah would have put them on his ark?  Or that any of the Asian religions would have hinted at their existence in their scriptures?

In fact, the very existence of Asian religions and the carbon dated proof that people migrated around the world before the bible says earth began would seem to put a dagger in the creationists arguments.

The real danger in this promulgation of creationism is that it creates an ignorant population.  It creates a population that is brain washed into the denial of science.  And it creates ignorant voters who elect ignorant Congressmen and Congresswomen.  Just look at Michelle Bachmann for an example of how this disrupts the political process of creating compromise.

I am not saying all Tea Partiers are ignorant, although I am tempted to say that.  And I am not saying that all Fed Bashers are ignorant, although I am tempted to say that (I wonder what they would have been saying if the Fed had not saved their real estate values by lowering interest rates?).

I am simply saying that ignorance is a danger to democracy and the state should not be making it easier to promulgate science denial.  No one offered me a subsidy to send my son to private school.  Private schools should have to meet some basic standards to be eligible to cash in vouchers.

Global Warming: Sell Your Barely Above Sea Level Property

The only question is when, not if, the sea levels will rise and cover land that millions of people live on.

I have never been an optimist that mankind would do whatever might be necessary to reduce the CO2 in the atmosphere, even though there is no doubt in my mind that human activity produces CO2 and higher levels of CO2 in the atmosphere cause warmer temperatures which in turn are reducing the ice pack.

The  reason for my pessimism is that this problem is rooted in 200 years of industrialization and rising living standards.  What created the life style that we in the developed world enjoy is based upon the use of carbon energy.  We cannot have our life style without the use of carbon energy.  And what we have in life style, is what those in the emerging and frontier markets want for their life style. They will continue to increase their use of carbon.  Only after attaining a certain life style will they start to understand the need to reduce their use of carbon.  Witness what is happening in China.

Committed politicians could change this with the use of market forces to generate incentives for non-carbon energy development and use.  Cap & Trade was designed by elements of the Republican Party as a market based alternative to carbon taxes.  But today, Cap & Trade is right there with another GOP idea, ObamaCare, as being toxic to support if you are a Republican.

Today I read a Bloomberg column explaining why this political pressure will never develop in the U.S.A.  Too many Americans, particularly those in the Republican Party, but also some independents and probably even some Democrats, believe that Global Warming is a normal part of the earth's cycle.  Evidence that the pace of change is faster then at any point in history (probably because of human use of carbon energy) is unconvincing to these people because they believe the scientists have an economic incentive to keep saying that carbon use is causing global warming.  The fact that these guys are paid is sufficient to introduce a doubt as to the credibility of what they are saying.  Even tho 98% of scientists in this field agree, these doubters believe the other 2% who somehow are not susceptible to being influenced by those that pay them.

In other words, the same mentality that leads to the belief that the NSA is listening to every phone call we make, that NIMBY'ism does not have an effect on economic growth, also leads to distrust of the government and science.  I don't believe it is possible to convince a closed mind.

So, as my son has stated for at least 5 years, good bye polar bears.  They are a goner.  So are many island nations, low-lying populated lands in numerous countries including Miami Beach and other parts of Florida, a lot of Manhattan and Baltimore, and who knows where else.  I have no idea how fast the waters will rise or how much they will rise.  Perhaps I should buy property in White Plains or Peekskill.  I just don't know how to profit from a relocation of Manhattan's vibrant upper income metropolitan center to another spot.  You would have to tear down almost everything just to rebuild the streets and mass transit to work efficiently.

Link to Bloomberg Article

The Satisfied Unsubsidized: or a Silent Big % of the Population

Please read this article by Andrew Sprung in The Atlantic.

Link to How ObamaCare works for lots of people

Crimea, Putin and China. This is not Democracy at work.

As I wrote earlier, I expected Crimea would play out with national agitation for a referendum, then a vote would take place saying the majority of the people wanted to return to being part of Russia (after all if Khruschev hadn't given it to the Ukraine after having a few too many, it would never have been part of the Ukraine), then there would have been negotiation between Russia and the Ukraine and a deal would have been struck returning Crimea to Russia.

That would have been a normal and proper path.  But Putin is a my way or the highway type of guy and seems to be losing touch with a balanced approach to the world.  I guess power must be going to his head as he seems to be an autocrat seemingly approved by a democratic vote, but where the votes don't seem to be completely free anymore.

I hope my old firm sold everything after I left, because I would not invest in Russia anymore.  Even owning stuff close to the state is no longer assessable risk, but faces political forces that cannot be assessed.  That is too bad.  If Obama wants travel restrictions to hurt, he is going to have to forbid the oligarchs who own stuff in NYC from traveling here.  That would mean the guy who owns the Nets and his daughter who lives in a $20 mm condo in midtown.  Putin has not faced the fury of a 20 something princess daughter who can no longer live in her NYC condo.  Of course, I doubt Putin is very supportive of women's rights and would probably tell the father to get the daughter married and producing young Russians to offset the population decline.

I mean life in Moscow can be pretty good if you have billions, but it isn't NYC and America.

Anyway, you would think U.S. Conservative Hardliners would understand Putin wasn't going to let Crimea go.  It would be the equivalent of the U.S.A. letting Guantanamo Bay go back to Cuba and can you image what John McCain and the neo-cons would have to say about that!

The really interesting conundrum is for China.  They preach no interference in internal affairs of nations and view borders as sacrosanct.  Using a vote as pretense to ratify a land grab is not what they want to see.  After all, few Taiwanese would vote to become part of the PRC again.  And who knows how Tibet or the Uyghurs would vote.  So China should be on the side of putting Putin down, but I doubt that would happen.  Autocrats do not criticize other autocrats.

We may not like the partisanship of American politics right now, but it sure beats the alternative.