Have You Triggered Surveillance Today?

I am fairly certain I have come across Homeland Security's naughty words list before, so the alarmist headlines readers may have seen accompanying it recently were probably more in the interest of driving page views than providing any kind of breaking news alert. That said, the list itself is not useless, and anyone who frequents social media might be interested in the words that may put you on the federal radar. For a full list of the key words used to monitor the web, check out Homeland Security's Analyst's Desktop Binder here. The list begins on numbered page 20, which is the 21st page of the document.

While many of the words on the list can be easily anticipated, there are others which might raise a few eyebrows, especially out of context, and which have probably put half the internet users in the country on an analyst's computer screen at one time or another like gas, agriculture, wave and smart. Even the term social media pops up, meaning that I have used at least five key words or terms already in this post alone.

I am sure some Americans will be outraged at this intrusion into privacy, and some would question the wisdom of including some of the terms. I also wonder if terrorists (we are up to at least six terms now) are actually spelling out their exact plans on websites (though they aren't known to be among the most thoughtful of interest groups). On the other hand, the government needs to start somewhere, and social media is public after all. In truth, and despite my typical pro-privacy stance, I feel a little bad for the analysts who have to sort through most of what I see on the web...trudging through the rants of the irrational for 40 hours a week is enough to make anyone a bit sick (and that's seven...).

A Soldier for a Soldier...

I wanted to take a few minutes to share a story I have heard about in the local media over the past few days and which has particular relevance and poignance the week of Memorial Day. Brendan Haas, a nine-year-old in Massachusetts, used some creative trading (and generous support) to turn a toy soldier into a trip to Disney World for the family of a recently fallen soldier, Timothy Steele. While of course no trip can replace this young father, perhaps the generosity and goodwill shown by strangers will help the Steele's with their healing process. The story also provides a stark reminder to many Americans that not everyone was able to spend Memorial Day at a barbecue...

Thanks to 7 News out of Boston for the video below.

Is Britain Better or Worse Off Than 60 Years Ago?

According to Reuters, 'Almost half of Britons believe Britain has changed for the worse during Queen Elizabeth's 60-year reign...a poll showed on Monday...The poll did not say how Britons felt their nation had changed for the worse.'

As the article notes, it is unclear why Britons feel that their island is worse off now than it was in the early 50's. Perhaps it is misplaced nostalgia, maybe a sense that current generations aren't of the same cloth as the WWII generation, maybe people genuinely miss never having the sun set on their empire.

Then again over 50% believe that Britain hasn't changed for the worse during that time (or are maybe neutral; the article was unclear). Compared to what you might see if you took the same poll in the U.S. right now, maybe that isn't so bad...

Why Aren't You Wearing a Starbucks Bracelet?

Maybe it is ironically declasse in these austere times to frequent Starbucks, but I will admit that I cross the threshold of my local once a day on average. While I am there, my eyes more often than not settle upon something that I have never seen anywhere else (i.e. people's wrists); the patriotically-themed Create Jobs for the USA bracelet. While I certainly don't want to suggest that creating jobs is unimportant, and while I have noted in the past my sense that socially-driven (or at least socially-linked) spending by consumers can be a good thing, this campaign just doesn't seem very useful to me.

I am sure someone at Starbucks (or an expensively-retained marketing firm) felt that these accompaniments could be the next Livestrong bracelet, but jobs for others just don't seem to invoke the same kind of passion as cancer. I wonder if this has something to do with a deeper set of psychologic factors, e.g. reticence and resignation over unemployment versus the fighting spirit that many cancer patients exhibit. If so it could be worth a white paper from a regional Fed branch. Maybe people just don't like how corporate-y they are.

In any case, shareholders haven't fared too poorly since the bracelets made their first appearance, so maybe there is a little magic to them after all...

Would a Grexit Be So Bad?

There has been a considerable amount of doom and gloom coming from some quarters about a potential Greek exit from the European monetary union or even the EU (though presumably not Europe itself as the continental shelf likely won't be so easily rid of its historic but troubled peninsula). That so much money, time and effort has been expended in the name of unity suggests that a break up is widely viewed as a bad thing.

There is often a sense that this has much to do with uncertainty, and the disaster scenario is often linked to some manner of contagion theory whereby the exit of Greece, or Grexit, would lead to a domino-like break up of the EU. However, there is another side to this coin, and some believe that an exit could actually be a much more orderly affair. For this minority perspective, check out this CNBC article centered around an interview with wealth manager Nick Dewhirst here.

Will the US Host the World Cup in 2014?

The best possible answer to the question in the title is 'not very likely' if for no other reason than the rights to host the Cup have already been awarded to Brazil. For those unfamiliar with the process, host countries are selected by FIFA, the world governing body of the beautiful game, under a competitive bid system. Brazil was awarded the 2014 Cup in 2007. This lag between announcement and opening ceremonies, typically anywhere from 6 to 12 years, is built-in to provide the lead time during which the winners can make all of the upgrades to airports, hotels, infrastructure and stadia that they promise in their bids.

Given this information, the question in the title to this post would be silly indeed if it weren't for Brazil's clear lack of progress toward many of the goals it set out and agreed to as prerequisites for hosting the Cup. Those familiar with global sports will know that the completion (or not) of many of these infrastructure improvements will have an impact on the Summer Olympics in 2016 as well as the games are scheduled to be held in Rio.

One might ask why the Cup was granted to Brazil if the country was so unprepared. The answer has to do with FIFA and its policies, and the body has many reasons for awarding countries hosting rights to the World Cup. Within the loose parameters of its new continental rotation schedule, it looks to reward countries that have helped contribute to the growth and popularity of the game (i.e. Brazil), looks for areas of growth (think the U.S. in 1994, Qatar in about a dozen years), and often seeks to make societal statements (think of a post-segregation South Africa in 2010). And, of course, those familiar with FIFA will be well aware of the plain old politics that goes into decisions as well.

More on Drones...

While domestic drone use has received a lot of unfavorable attention in America recently, American use of drones abroad is even more contentious. Indeed, the use of drones by the US military to eliminate threats abroad could be described as everything from perfectly legal to a war crime depending on whose interpretations of international law one accepts.

For a few reasons why drone use may be closer to the latter than the former, it would be difficult to find a better (relatively) brief analysis than Bill Quigley's recent article on the blog ReligiousLeftLaw. Those interested can find the post here. For those interested in the other side of the story, there are apparently some iron-clad reasons why the practice is legal, the government just doesn't seem to want to share them...

The Only Winner in the Facebook Fiasco...

Though history might prove me wrong, I would venture a guess that there was only one real clear winner in the aftermath of the Facebook IPO fiasco (so long as you don't count the employees who cashed out early and often). The banks look bad, NASDAQ looks bad, the company looks bad, investors look bad. The regulators are getting involved due to the poor efforts of all of the above. Lawsuits are already being filed. In this carnage, who could possibly be a winner?

None other than the good old New York Stock Exchange. While representatives haven't said much publicly, you can bet that they will be very happy to tout the benefits of market makers and floor traders when the representatives of the next big name going public come around. Though it lost out on the biggest (by name and probably size) IPO of the year, the folks at the NYSE have to be happy with how it all turned out.

UPDATE: After I wrote this, it came to my attention that NYSE might be looking to capitalize on the NASDAQ fiaso even before the next big name going public comes around...Bloomberg has the details here.

In Praise of Trains...

Over the past dozen or so years, I have made a lot of trips between various combinations of Boston, Providence, New York, Philadelphia and Washington, DC. Due to the fact that some of these trips were connected to moves and trips to and from school, I have utilized everything from the cheapest buses to U-hauls in addition to the more typical planes, trains and automobiles in doing so. In short, I consider myself a banner member of the great I-95 traversing fraternity. 

Though I blow hot and cold on the various means of transportation up and down the east coast, changing my mind almost as often as I make one of these journeys, at this very moment I would like to take some time to sing the praises of the train system.

With traffic being a consistent issue and airports being less than pleasurable experiences, the leg room and amenities of train travel can be much more pleasurable than driving, taking cramped buses or flying. Now, Amtrak hasn't always managed to get pricing right for what it offers in my opinion, particularly when compared to European counterparts. However, if you can manage to book in advance and save a few bucks off of a comparable plane trip, the train can be a very nice experience. That I have a double seat to myself as I type this probably doesn't hurt...

Open Call for Unpublished Journal Articles...

Long-time readers might be familiar with the murky origins of BlawgConomics. For those newer to the site, what you are reading right now was made possible by a (probably) rash decision which was (definitely) made at a popular post-lecture watering hole in DC a few years back. The decision? It was to forgo a certain hallowed law school rite of passage...journal competition. The decision-making process was impacted mainly by an understanding of the journal system and the fact that working on a journal doesn't have much correlation to being published in a journal. And as I like the sound of my own words above all else, the facts of journal life and my own desires were clearly incompatible. Yadda, yadda, yadda...BlawgConomics.

However, I am sure that there are a lot of readers who went to law school, were more responsible than me, and did their journal duty (and are probably glad to have proof of the experience on their resumes at interview time) who are sitting on unpublished articles at this very moment. Clearly there are many intelligent people out there who have something interesting to say who just don't have a forum. I think that is a shame because one of the things that I am proudest of with regards to the site is the fact that I have been able to provide a platform for ideas that might not be expressed otherwise.

Therefore, if you have a paper touching upon some of the typical areas of interest for BlawgConomics readers, I would love to be able to publish an abstract or summary for you. As I have done a few times in the past, I might even work with you to get a full-length article posted. I know it isn't the same as getting it posted in the Harvard Review of WhateverYouWroteAbout, but with Google and the regular traffic we receive here, it is very likely that people who are curious about your topic will get to see your work. And that is at least as good as it taking up space on your hard-drive. Contact me at editor (at) blawgconomics.com if you are interested.


Editor's note: I certainly don't discriminate, and have posted work from articles which did get published as well, so please feel free to contact me in either case.

On the Benefits of Sneakery

While the benefits of transparency are undoubted and (we are often told) nearly infinite in number, once in a while a good old dose of hush hush can be just what the doctor ordered. One example comes from the European Central Bank's (ECB) recent dealings with Greece. From CNBC:

Overnight, the Financial Times revealed that Greece’s banking system was being propped up by the emergency liquidity, approved secretly by the ECB. The ECB’s weekly statement on banks’ use of emergency liquidity assistance (ELA) showed a spike at the end of last month.

Analysts at Barclays now believe Greece is now using 96 billion euros in ELA, with Ireland accounting for another 41 billion euros and Cyprus 4 billion euros.

If correct, the total ELA in use has exceeded 140 billion euros – more than 10 per cent of the amount lent to euro zone banks in standard monetary policy operations. Such an amount would require the approval of the ECB’s 23-member general council because of the risk of increasing inflation as a result of providing extra liquidity above 50 billion euros.

While it appears that some information, like the weekly statement, has come out (with good results; investors cheered the backing Europe is giving the Greeks) there is still enough cloak and dagger about the situation to be useful to bankers. For example, while there is some information available, a lot of the 'conclusions' floating around in the media this morning are based on analyst speculation. Indeed, 'believe' and 'if correct' are the glaringly operative terms from the CNBC article linked to above.

Why Rhode Island's Proposed Homeless Bill of Rights Doesn't Work, And Alternatives

Legislators in Rhode Island are currently contemplating a statutory bill of rights which would be specifically applicable to the homeless population of the state. While I am of course aware that there are many, many other factors at play aside from economics here, I think that analyzing the bill through the lens of economic analysis can help us to understand why the legislation is unlikely to pass and also how some of its goals might otherwise be met. First off, some background on what the Bill of Rights would do might be helpful. From CBS Connecticut:

The bill would specifically prohibit law enforcement, health care workers, potential landlords or employers from treating homeless people unfairly because of their housing status. The measure’s sponsor, Sen. John Tassoni, said most Americans probably aren’t aware of the daily discrimination faced by homeless people.

Tassoni said he’s heard stories about homeless people being kicked out of libraries even though they had library cards, rejected for jobs or apartments, or told to leave a public park just because they were homeless. He said he sponsored the bill to make it clear that homeless people must be treated just like anyone else.

The bill was passed by the state Senate earlier this month and currently awaits a vote in the House. With no vote scheduled, it is possible that it will go unaddressed before lawmakers adjourn for the year, which will likely be next month. According to the CBS piece linked to above, lawmakers in that chamber are concerned over implementation and enforcement of the sweeping bill.

On Facebook...

I guessing that a lot of the newly-minted millionaires hanging out around San Francisco over the weekend didn't let it bother them too much, but the Facebook initial public offering (IPO) didn't go so well on Friday.

This wasn't entirely unpredictable. Despite movies being made about it and its Live platform serving as a stop on the virtual campaign trail, the company does not make as much money as its IPO valuation would suggest it does based on any theory of investing I am familiar with. Indeed, I noted nearly a year ago in this article (particularly in the comments) that the numbers being assigned to the company in private sales appeared to be a little (even incredibly) overheated based on the limited revenue numbers that had then been made available.

In addition to valuation issues, there were numerous price revisions in the lead-up to the sale, a greater number of shares were floated than anticipated, and, in a lightly ironic twist, technology issues created delays in trading. However, veteran market watchers will have anticipated the last minute glitches that occurred. And, it was clear that some investors were very keen to get in on the action, despite what anyone was saying about valuation.

Even if They Aren't Watching You Bathe...

Unlike terrorists, potential terrorists and those who happen to live near terrorists abroad, Americans don't necessarily have to worry about death from above yet. However, with the FAA predicting that up to 30,000 surveillance drones could be in operation in the US within the next 8 years, other concerns with respect to their use have recently come into the spotlight.

While most domestic anti-drone sentiment to date has come from those who would like to be able to live their lives without eyes on them at all times, it would appear that there are plain old safety concerns related to their use as well. In a recent example, Infowars.com reported on a close call an airplane near Denver had with what appeared to be an unmanned drone. From the site:

A mystery object, thought to be a military or law enforcement drone, flying in controlled airspace over Denver almost caused a catastrophic mid air crash with a commercial jet Monday.

As noted above, privacy advocates are up in arms about drone use. However, without regulations outlining exactly how these high-flying cameras will be used, it appears that safety issues exist as well; even those who manage to go without being watched on a regular basis may still have to contend with the consequences of drone use.

Short of drone programs being discontinued (which seems unlikely at this point), here's hoping that some very firm rules are established for their use. Otherwise, they will be watching our lives while they are putting them in danger. Despite some legitimate uses, it is difficult to see the benefit in that.

Snippets...The Same-Sex Marriage Edition

There has been no hotter topic in American politics recently than same-sex marriage. I have been accumulating a number of different stories in the 'draft' bin that I have wanted to say a few words about, but I have become overwhelmed by the all of the different angles. Therefore, it would seem that there would be no better time than the present for the latest edition of Snippets, our semi-regular attempt at covering a lot of topics in a little time. Some would call this lazy; economists prefer the term 'efficient.'

- Let's kick this edition off with the recent story that brought same-sex marriage back into spotlight. Most of our readers will undoubtedly have heard of Joe Biden's 'gaffe' in supporting same-sex marriage. Here is the video if you haven't seen it yet.

- Of course Biden's comments 'forced the president's hand' later that week, leading him to come out in support of same-sex marriage. You can see the president work his way through that announcement in the video below (sorry about the ads, but I am sure you are all familiar with the idea that lunches aren't free...).



- Perhaps Obama's support of same-sex marriage isn't so shocking once one considers the rapidly rising level of support it has among the public. This support is obviously higher among his base, which many pundits agree will require aggressive mobilization efforts if support levels will come close to approaching what Obama enjoyed in 2008. Not to be sceptical or anything...

I'm No Birther, But...

After conservative news site Breitbart brought the issue into the open yesterday, other websites have been reporting on a write-up by President Obama's literary agent stating that he was born in Kenya. From the Breitbart article:

Breitbart News has obtained a promotional booklet produced in 1991 by Barack Obama's then-literary agency, Acton & Dystel, which touts Obama as "born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii." The booklet, which was distributed to "business colleagues" in the publishing industry, includes a brief biography of Obama among the biographies of eighty-nine other authors represented by Acton & Dystel. It also promotes Obama's anticipated first book, Journeys in Black and White--which Obama abandoned, later publishing Dreams from My Father instead.

Obama’s biography in the booklet is as follows:

Barack Obama, the first African-American president of the Harvard Law Review, was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii. The son of an American anthropologist and a Kenyan finance minister, he attended Columbia University and worked as a financial journalist and editor for Business International Corporation. He served as project coordinator in Harlem for the New York Public Interest Research Group, and was Executive Director of the Developing Communities Project in Chicago’s South Side. His commitment to social and racial issues will be evident in his first book, Journeys in Black and White.

The folks at Breitbart go on to note that the deceased Andrew Breitbart, "...was never a "Birther," and Breitbart News is a site that has never advocated the narrative of "Birtherism." In fact, Andrew believed, as we do, that President Barack Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, on August 4, 1961. Yet Andrew also believed that the complicit mainstream media had refused to examine President Obama's ideological past, or the carefully crafted persona he and his advisers had constructed for him."

Will Google Shut Me Down?

Google, the company which owns the Blogger platform I utilize to post and host content, has been shutting down sites lately. Many have noted that most of the sites have been on the conservative end of the spectrum. In one recent example, a blog was shut down very shortly after its author called for the death of terrorist Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. Pundits have noted that similar practices occurred during the last presidential election and have also cited Google's ties to the Obama administration as proof of the company's biased approach and nefarious intent.

Google, the company which owns the Blogger platform I utilize to post and host content, has recently been placed on alert after a series of what appear to be politically-motivated attacks on websites it hosts. It appears that the sites in question are often spam attacked (or are reported to the platform to be spam) by those who disagree with the views of their authors. As per protocol, this triggers the Blogger team to shut the site down to review it. This practice, which was also noted during the last presidential election, seems to be back in vogue again as a self-styled conservative blog was recently shut down after its author called for the death of terrorist Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

Readers will note the contrasting tones of the above paragraphs. Both describe the same set of events (I even used the same links) and both versions of the story have been reported in the press. I would like to take a few minutes to talk about why I think either scenario is disturbing.

On FATCA and the Law of Unintended Consequences...Or Not

From a recent Bloomberg article:

Go away, American millionaires. That’s what some of the world’s largest wealth-management firms are saying ahead of Washington’s implementation of the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, known as Fatca, which seeks to prevent tax evasion by Americans with offshore accounts. HSBC Holdings Plc (HSBA), Deutsche Bank AG, Bank of Singapore Ltd. and DBS Group Holdings Ltd. (DBS) all say they have turned away business. “I don’t open U.S. accounts, period,” said Su Shan Tan, head of private banking at Singapore-based DBS, Southeast Asia’s largest lender, who described regulatory attitudes toward U.S. clients as “Draconian.”

One might imagine that implementing such legislation would have the effect of pushing those who care greatly about tax losses to friendlier jurisdictions (while presumably not everyone can just up and go to other countries whenever they please, this is clearly less of an issue for the types of inviduals impacted by legislation like FATCA). On the evidence they would be correct, with Facebook co-founder Eduardo Saverin serving as a recent example.

Some amateur economists in the crowd might be eager to cite the loss of wealthy individuals due to tax policy as an example of the law of unintended consequences. But I wonder...maybe losing millionaires like Saverin isn't unintended at all?

Freedom of Speech, Not Freedom from Consequences...

There are a few broad areas of discussion that have arisen so often on this page that posts on these topics have come to feature under general, recurring titles. Adventures in Supply and Demand and Economics for Lawyers (aka Dummies) quickly come to mind. In what is unfortunately becoming a topic with as many opportunities for discussion as supply and demand, I turn once again to someone facing adverse consequences for the free exercise of speech.

Ms. Naomi Schaefer Riley of The Chronicle of Higher Education caused a stir recently when she declared Black Studies to be a useless major/area of study. Her evidence? From her original article:

You’ll have to forgive the lateness but I just got around to reading The Chronicle’s recent piece on the young guns of black studies. If ever there were a case for eliminating the discipline, the sidebar explaining some of the dissertations being offered by the best and the brightest of black-studies graduate students has made it. What a collection of left-wing victimization claptrap. The best that can be said of these topics is that they’re so irrelevant no one will ever look at them.

After Shaefer Riley faced varying levels of support and reprobation in the comments section of that article, she wrote 'A Response to Critics' which can be found here. After it published that post, The Chronicle let her go, apparently due to the firestorm she caused rather than the content of her actual posts:

'When we published Naomi Schaefer Riley’s blog posting on Brainstorm last week…several thousand of you spoke out in outrage and disappointment that The Chronicle had published an article that did not conform to the journalistic standards and civil tone that you expect from us. We now agree that Ms. Riley’s blog posting did not meet The Chronicle’s basic editorial standards for reporting and fairness in opinion articles. As a result, we have asked Ms. Riley to leave the Brainstorm blog.'

Book Review: Imagine: How Creativity Works by Jonah Lehrer

I made a promise to readers a while back that I would undertake a review of the new book Imagine: How Creativity Works by Jonah Lehrer. I wrote at that time that the title seemed destined for big sales and book club attention. These were perhaps safe bets as the book debuted at #1 on the New York Times Bestseller List for Non-fiction, but its momentum has been sustained since. Of course writing a review carries the requirement of reading the book, and I was finally able to do so in parts over the past week.

Many other reviews I have read have been sparkling. However, I have to admit that I was not entirely satisfied with this effort. I was left with a feeling that the book only scratched the surface of its potential and that much more could have been done in two areas; first the actual science behind the electric impulses that make the brain go was given short shrift. Secondly, I believe that more could have been done with practical ideas and concepts to help stimulate the creative process. Additionally, there is a mixing of causation and correlation which seems to be too easy a trap of someone of Lehrer's clear intellect to fall prey to, but which exists nonetheless.

On the first point, this is of course just a problem facing any writer who brings intellectual concepts to the masses. Lehrer probably did well to steer clear of neuroscience in all its glory. If he hadn't, his time on the Bestseller lists would have been short indeed. And, of course, for those who are interested in such things, there are books available which are far more inclusive, albeit less convenient for the beach, a flight, or the poolside, all likely habitats in which the book hunter will find Imagine.

Though my first critique more or less describes one of the limitations of those who write popular books, my second is perhaps more valid because of Lehrer's intent to do so. It seems likely that Lehrer's target audience of the average, literate masses would be keen on gaining some insights into how to unleash the incredible power of the mind. While Lehrer walks readers through the potential powers of cocaine, benzedrine and marijuana, I find it doubtful that anyone not already utilizing such substances will do so to help them write poetry or do math problems. It is also unclear what of practical everyday use should be taken from stories of those who have suffered brain trauma or disease and therefore use unaffected parts of their brains more effectively. In short, this book is no self-help guide on ramping up the creative process, and those who expect it to be will be left feeling a little disappointed.

The State of Air Travel

Once in a while I stumble across a discussion of the wretched state of air travel. Such articles/posts typically include a lament for the halcyon days of flights being limited to men in suits and women in evening wear. While I agree that air travel isn't always the most luxurious of endeavors these days, I disagree with the notion that it has much to do with the attire of one's fellow passengers.

Cramped seats, poor seating layouts, a lack of snacks to say nothing of meals, the decline of the in-flight drink, long airport wait times, the requirement to largely disrobe while going through security, a reduction in carry-on space; all these factors and more have tilted the scale deeply in favor of comfort and utility over formality.

Of course consumers have had a role in this. Demand for cheap flights, which can most easily be sated through cramping and cutting costs, has led to this state of affairs. However, I don't think most people would want to return to the days when only the wealthy could travel by air. What solution then? Perhaps acceptance is the key. I think we all just have to accept that the way air travel occurs has changed forever. Those looking for a more formal experience may have to look elsewhere.

Air Force One and the Incumbent Advantage

In the May 5th edition of The Economist, the Lexington column topic of the day was the incumbent advantage that comes with the US presidency. One of the items under discussion was the use of Air Force One as a flying version of the whistle-stop tour trains of old. From the column:

The use and abuse of the big Boeing is a subject of perennial contention during election campaigns. In theory the president is entitled to use it at taxpayers' expense only when he is on official business. His campaign is required to reimburse the government for whatever portion of a trip is devoted to electioneering.

Recent visits to college campuses full of fans were cited as very gray-area situations. Since the column was written, another might be a certain visit to California, while some might even consider Obama's recent 'super secret' trip to Afghanistan more for the benefit of fence-sitting voters than troop morale. Of course the author goes on to wish luck to any lawyer who thinks he might be able to tease out a gotcha moment when traveling by AF1 is seen as de rigueur in terms of presidential safety. And Americans surely wouldn't advocate for a no campaigning rule; otherwise what would we watch on TV for 24 hours a day?

Therefore, it seems likely that incumbents will just continue to have this built-in advantage. As the use of the presidential jet is an advantage taken by presidents of both parties, there is at least no bias...taxpayers seem likely to foot the bill no matter who is in power.

Finding a Middle Ground on the Internet

I have often written about internet freedom and the perils that can accompany real government regulation of the virtual world. I recently saw an article that provides the stark counterpoint to that viewpoint. From Yahoo!:

Interpol president Khoo Boon Hui said on Tuesday that organised international gangs are behind most internet scams and that cyber crime's estimated cost is more than that of cocaine, heroin and marijuana trafficking put together.

Speaking to delegates at the opening of the France-based international police agency's European Regional Conference in Tel Aviv, Khoo quoted a study by London's Metropolitan University indicating that "80 percent of crime committed online is now connected to organised gangs operating across borders. Criminal gangs now find that transnational and cyber crime are far more rewarding and profitable than other, riskier forms of making money," he said.

"Experts have warned that the cost of cyber crime is larger than the combined costs of cocaine, marijuana and heroin trafficking. In Europe, the cost of cybercrime has apparently reached 750 billion euros ($979 billion) a year," he said...He said that US banks reportedly lost $900 million (690 million euros) to conventional robbers last year but $12 billion (9.2 billion euros) to cyber criminals. (emphasis added)

Such statistics should remind internet freedom advocates of the other side of the coin. Though I am a staunch advocate of internet rights, there are real issues that come along with not policing the internet at all. There just has to be some middle ground between over-reaching legislation and lawlessness

Too often that potential middle ground is lost as Big Brother and those who would oppose him bump heads. And, of course, as part of any discussion on this matter, there has to be a recognition of the fact that freedom advocates and those who commit crimes on the web have a very complicated, often incestuous relationship. Such a state of affairs necessarily obfuscates the issues in any reasoned debate.

Like many other people, I bank online, I shop online and I enjoy knowing that there are some safeguards against my information being commandeered by parties who would do me harm. I also like having all of the acquired knowledge of humanity at my fingertips and the ability to share my thoughts with the world without fear of repression. I believe that, taken together, those positions represent a majority opinion, and there should be a way to represent them using a legal framework. Until then, I will likely continue to join others in fighting against bills which give the government nearly unlimited power with no accountability to match.

Soros Gives a Bunch, Should Americans Care?

The Wall St. Journal reported yesterday that uber-liberal George Soros is planning on donating to pro-Obama super PACs this year. Though his $1 million donation is significantly less than some others he has made in the past, it is still a lot of money to most people in America and should provide fodder for right-wing radio hosts and bloggers for months to come. If the right is unhappy with Soros' contribution to the reelection efforts of the President, the left has been furious with the donations of right-leaning donors such as the Koch brothers.

Though this notion might not get much support from readers, I would like to suggest that none of this matters. When it all shakes out, millions and millions of dollars will be spent by both sides during this election cycle to convince voters that their candidate is a swell guy. Or perhaps more correctly, that the other candidate isn't. While many people are unhappy with corporations or individuals exerting that type of monetary influence over the electoral process, why should we care so much?

Most Americans probably agree with, and disagree with, some of what each side has to say. Even if each respective side pays a lot to say it, I imagine most Americans will still make up their own minds on the issues, and in turn the candidates. In sum, I think it might be safe to say that the legacy of Citizens United and Speechnow is more the holes the decisions are leaving in wallets than any perversion of the democratic process. Of course, any reader interested in changing my mind has a good shot if they can be convincing enough...

The Avengers, Or: The Rising Tide Lifts All Ships

Earlier today I posted a brief piece on how prediction markets were responding to the Hollande presidential victory in France. The conclusion was that despite campaign promises which, if fulfilled, would seem to put the fragile state of the European Union in jeopardy, that people were betting on the status quo. Very low odds of defaults, losses of credit ratings, or the downfall of the Euro were the norm. However, things got a little more interesting when I took a look at a few bets on Hollywood.

All Lord of the Rings fans will be aware that Tolkien's related classic The Hobbit is coming to a big screen near you during Christmas season this year. And, after The Avengers broke box office records over the weekend, folks on prediction markets priced a big opening-weekend for the Middle Earth tale far higher. Markets were higher on movies such as the next installment of the Batman franchise and the next Twilight movie as well. I guess, to slightly adapt the cliche in the title, a rising box office lifts all blockbusters...

What are the Prediction Markets Telling Us About the Hollande Victory?

Over the weekend, Francois Hollande, as expected, won the French presidency. As a member of the Socialist party, some have speculated that he will break with 'the plan' calling for austerity which European nations have agreed to. While this would put France at odds with other nations, including close friend Germany, Hollande wasn't elected to stick with the status quo, and he may feel that he has the political capital to put government spending measures in place. This has led to such jitters among pro-austerity alarmists that I thought I might check in with Blawgconomics favorite Intrade to see what (hypothetically) more rational punters thought about Hollande's victory and what it might mean for the future of the EU:

- The odds that any country currently using the Euro will announce an intention to drop it before the end of the year are predicted to be less than 30% and were steady after the election.
- Those odds rise to 48% at the end of next year and 57% when the horizon is extended to year-end 2014.
- The odds of any of the current European whipping boys being declared in default by the end of the year have been declining of late.
- While the odds are low (2.5%), people have been betting slightly in favor of the idea that Germany could lose its AAA credit rating by year-end.

While these (admittedly limited) results are decidedly mixed they by no means do they suggest that people think the sky is falling. In addition, markets around Europe, including in France, closed higher Monday (though lower today...). This was after Hollande made campaign promises to raise taxes on corporations and high net worth individuals to pay for his spending plans. Maybe shareholders are buying into the old saw that politicians will say anything to get elected and don't really believe that there will be taxes increases biting into profits any time soon?

More likely there is optimism after the wrapping up of what many perceived was the lame duck presidency of Nicolas Sarkozy. And perhaps it reflects a positive reaction to the idea of state spending in the face of a more austere German/British measures. EU proponents should hope that such optimism has a foundation in reality; if things go wrong in France, it isn't only the French who will suffer.

Junior Seau and the NFL's Big Problem

I have written fairly extensively (just put 'NFL' into the search box above, left) about the legal and image problems the NFL is facing with regards to concussions over the past few months. In particular, one of my recurring messages has been that America is a nation of hypocrites its citizens loudly bemoan things like Bounty-Gate while still spending a whole day of the week (plus Monday nights, and sometimes Thursdays, and even Saturdays late in the season) watching the NFL.

As brutal as the sport is, it takes some mental gymnastics to be opposed to someone being paid a few thousand dollars to knock an opponent out of a game but cheering wildly your team making a goal-line stand which happens to end with a player receiving a grade-2 concussion. In other words, while most would consider it silly for any self-proclaimed fan of the game to be upset over the latter, I believe that in that context the outrage over the former is equally as silly.

Of course, the contra to that reasoning becomes clear even when unspoken; that one could rightly be outraged about bounties if they are of the mind that the NFL is too brutal to begin with. In full disclosure, I don't come out on that side of the argument. Additionally, I believe that anyone in the NFL is there by choice, not mandate or fiat. However, it certainly strikes me as more genuine to say that football itself needs to change than to say that paying millionaires a few hundred extra dollars to do something they are being paid millions to do anyway is somehow morally outrageous. And, I believe that the NFL has been exhibiting signs of coming around to this line of thinking recently.

Adventures in Supply and Demand: Dating Guests of the State

Apparently the eHarmonys and Match.coms of the world have not been able to keep up with all of the myriad needs of the growing online dating population. For those who just don't feel that the typical online dating scene has been quite dangerous enough for them, there is meet-an-inmate.com.

While the site has been around for a while, (since 1998 according to the FAQs), it has gained some attention in the press recently after the folks at Ranker.com let their visitors rate the hotness of the various female drug possessors, identity thieves and burglars who have chosen to post pictures and brief blurbs to the site.

For any ladies in the audience who are titillated by the concept of starting a relationship with someone whose peers thought that a visit to county would be best for society, there are men on meet-an-inmate as well. However, you will have to do a little more leg work as Ranker hasn't pre-screened the gentlemen for you yet.

For any of our readers who would take the plunge, I would direct you to the disclaimer which can be found at the bottom of the home page as well as below. Something tells me this isn't iron-clad, but do we as a society wants laws and weak disclaimers to get in the way of true love? I will let our readers make that decision for themselves...

We (meet-an-inmate.com) accept no responsibility for the accuracy of any content found within these pages. The appropriate safeguards should be used in communicating with any person(s) that you may meet through this service. By using this service, you agree to not hold us responsible for any costs, liabilities, attorney's fee or damages that you may incur. The ads placed on my service are written by the inmates and we are only the means by which their ads are published. To use this service you must be at least 18 years of age.

Is Your Unemployment Cyclical or Structural?

As the Great Recession trudges steadily along, the economic question du jour seems to be whether America's cyclical unemployment problem is morphing into a structural unemployment problem.

Boiled down to their essences, the former is the short-term spike in unemployment which comes with a bust in the business cycle. Meanwhile the latter is the long-term unemployment rate caused by frictions between the types of labor supplied and demanded in an economy. As it might be imagined, economists view a high structural rate to be worse than a high cyclical rate; cycles, by nature, are not permanent while a structural rate is about as permanent as economic concepts get, at least in the medium term.

I think we can all agree that having a large percentage of the population staying at home being unproductive over the long-term is not a good thing for an economy. Additionally, if workers' skills don't match up well with the demands of the economy they work in, there are obvious negative implications for their employability. This situation typically leads to a necessity for worker retraining, which is an economic cost on individuals and society.

Adventures in Consumer Behavior, Or: Chicken Salad Lovers of the World Unite

Regular readers who are familiar with the man behind this blog may know that in addition to a predisposition for sharing musings on everything from politics to sports with the world, I have a fondness for chicken salad. While I enjoy the chicken salad that I make, the typical hurdles life often places in the way render it difficult for me to whip up a batch every time I have a hankering. Therefore, I often turn to alternative suppliers to meet my needs.

In other words, I often buy my chicken salad from the store. Due to its proximity to work, the store that meets this need is typically the Whole Foods in Boston's West End. While going there means that I pay more for my chicken salad than I would if I bought it from many other places (or made it myself), I suffer this marginal premium for the sake of convenience, because the product is consistent and because Whole Foods offers some interesting takes on my favored treat, including a curry-seasoned version and something the marketing folks there call Sonoma.

These exotic species of the chicken salad genus reside in the prepared foods case, typically nestled among myriad skewers, pasta salads and a platter that is somehow perpetually overflowing with seared tuna. Today, needing a protein fix, I wandered the approximately 150 yards from my office door to Whole Foods and lightheadedly made my way to the aforementioned prepared foods counter. What I found there was a very plain chicken salad. In and of itself, this was no problem. Sometimes a chicken salad without grapes or a curry powder-powered yellow tint is a fine option, and their plain version is pretty close to what I make, and enjoy, at home.

What is a Minority?

As I did recently with the HOV lane story, I am going local today (though, like the HOV story, this story has bigger implications than in just my home state). In this post, we turn to Elizabeth Warren and the Massachusetts Senate race. For those unfamiliar with Mrs. Warren, she is a Harvard professor who helped the Obama administration get the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau off the ground and is currently in a heated battle with incumbent Scott Brown for Ted Kennedy's old seat.

Warren has been receiving some unfavorable press recently as the Boston Herald has been reporting (and opining) on her use of the 'minority' designation on professorial job applications and in legal directories dating back to the 1980's. She has claimed that she had done so due to her Native American heritage and a desire to find people with similar backgrounds. Because she looks like she could have just walked off of an Air France flight at most of her appearances, some people have questioned this explanation and used her use of the minority label as an unfavorable proxy for her general honesty and integrity.

In addition to raising issues on her honesty, this story has also brought the question of what a minority is into the spotlight (again). This is an issue that hits very close to home for your humble scribe as, by most family accounts, I have at least as much Native American blood as the 1/32nd Mrs. Warren claims. That I have never marked this on an application for a job, or college, or law school is a personal choice. I have never faced persecution due to my heritage, nor is it something that I have particularly embraced; respected, yes. Considered, clearly. However being part Chippewa is not something that has impacted me, negatively by status, or positively by choice, any more than being part English, Canadian, Polish or Russian.

Thoughts on the Correspondents' Dinner...

Regular readers may have picked up on the fact that I have been pointing out examples of campaigning by President Obama recently. That I haven't been doing so for Mitt Romney is merely a matter of circumstances; campaigning is all he does whereas the President is still ostensibly running the country. As such, his examples of hitting the campaign trail are a little more noticeable, even if they are more subtly executed.

And that subtlety is exactly why I think it has been so fascinating to note when such campaigning has occurred. In my opinion, the President has done a masterful job of sitting back in a very presidential manner and picking spots to attack while the GOP ripped itself to shreds and Mr. Romney fell uncomfortably (for him) to the right.

The latest example* of this subtle campaigning was most certainly the White House Correspondents' Dinner, of which we have posted a transcript and a highlight video. At the dinner, the President was more comfortable and confident than I have seen him since perhaps the last election cycle. Granted, even I don't have the ability to watch every speech, analyze every handshake and ponder every bill signing.

The Dual Critical Role and Culpability of the Media in State v. Zimmerman

After it was widely reported last week that George Zimmerman had posted bail and would be free while waiting for his trial to begin, I resolved for the umpteenth time to write a bit about the situation. It only seems right to tackle one of the biggest legal stories of the day on a legal blog after all. Indeed it might be fair to ask why I haven't yet.

To be honest, I have found it to be incredibly difficult to form and express an opinion on this case. The main reason is that I was uncomfortable doing so without knowing all of the facts. The fact is, I didn't know what happened between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin in the aftermath of the shooting. Maybe Zimmerman was a racist, intent on killing an African American for sport without fear of retribution. Maybe Zimmerman was afraid for his life after a youth he had been following as a neighborhood watcher attacked him. I just didn't know.

As both of those versions of the events of that night made the rounds once the story went national, it would have been easy for me to grasp onto one version or another. Maybe this would have been influenced by my own prejudices. Maybe it would have been influenced by the websites I tend to visit, or the channels I tend to watch, or the commentators I tend to read. The fact is, the stories that were coming out were so self-serving to whatever side was writing the script that I refused to buy either version.

Now, it has become clearer with the passage of time that something happened between Zimmerman and Martin which, at the very least, requires the opinion of a jury to sort out. It is likely at this point that no one, aside from Zimmerman himself, has a clearer picture of the events of that tragic night than the prosection. Once the prosecution elected to forego the opinion of a grand jury and went directly to pretrial with a second degree murder charge, it became much clearer to me that, in the eyes of the law, Zimmerman at the least has some questions to answer. And, if it is found that Zimmerman has acted outside the law, I would like to think that most people would be united by a hope that justice is served.