tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-78635818430883709502024-03-09T02:19:45.904-05:00BlawgConomicsLaw, Economics, Politics, CultureJosh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.comBlogger1080125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-82919663362805250212013-11-05T06:46:00.000-05:002013-11-05T12:21:08.683-05:00The Problem with LibertarianismLibertarianism has created some excitement among the American masses recently in lock-step with the perception that government interference in citizens' lives is on the rise. However, opponents like to point out that libertarianism is not a panacea to societal ills, that there are problems with the philosophy. At least one of those problems, <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/uruguay/10216201/A-guide-to-the-worlds-most-libertarian-countries.html">even among journalists,</a> seems to be that no one can agree upon what it actually means or what its adherents stand for...Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com21tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-40629780499548614882013-11-04T07:40:00.000-05:002013-11-04T07:40:01.064-05:00Obamacare Proving My Point Better Than I Ever CouldI have spoken unfavorably about Obamacare many times on this page. While I didn't like the voting process related to it, the forced coverage language or the taxes and the rising costs that would necessarily be associated with it, my real core argument against it was always a little more nuanced. After all, single-payer systems (I know Obamacare is not that; maybe that is part of the problem) in some places work well, are viewed favorably, and are entrenched as critical safety nets in the societies they exist in. <br />
<br />
No, my problem with Obamacare was not that it existed, or that some were daring to dream about universal(ish) coverage, but rather that the United States would be running it. <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57610328/obamacare-enrollments-got-off-to-very-slow-start-documents-show/">Evidence since its inception</a> has done nothing to change my viewpoint, and it has indeed made more 'nuanced' and practical opponents out of many people who opposed it simply on gut previously. The process itself is doing more to prove my points than my limited writing skills have allowed for. As the lawyers in the crowd might say,<em> res ipsa loquitur...</em>Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com23tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-31299120709922505702013-11-02T09:26:00.000-04:002013-11-02T09:26:04.789-04:00The Price of Liberty...I had to make a quick stop into the office this morning. Unfortunately, part of the Metro system I would have taken was closed. Fear not dear readers - this was due to weekend track work, not a lesser-reported government shutdown!<br />
<br />
Instead of taking the shuttle that was on offer, I decided instead to walk the rest of my trip as it was nice out and as it was less than two miles (if I am being honest, I could probably use the exercise as well). On the way, and on a piece of granite in front of the National Archives I have probably passed dozens of times in a cab or else otherwise too preoccupied to notice, was a quote: "Vigilance is the price of liberty".<br />
<br />
While it is a nice quote, and probably wouldn't look out of place on a t-shirt or a bumper sticker on a pick-up truck, I began to wonder something very simple; on whose pick-up truck?<br />
<br />
Indeed, the quote could mean very different things to different people. To a Supreme Court justice, it could mean being vigilant in the face of unconstitutional laws. To a border patrol agent or DEA agent, it might mean being vigilant at our borders. It would have obvious implications for a Senator on an oversight committee, or a Secret Service agent or a soldier or any number of people who pass through Washington, DC on a regular basis. <br />
<br />
However, to me it holds a special resonance simply as a citizen. In the face of NSA surveillance, drone activity, Google data collection, internet scams and everything else that could put our liberty at risk, it is particularly important that citizens remain vigilant. While there have been some signs of this in recent times, it is clear that not enough of a tax is being paid for the benefit of liberty in America today. Maybe laziness or apathy is to blame. Perhaps it is a ratings and agenda-driven media. <br />
<br />
In any case, if the quote is to ring true, it must start, as a baseline, with the people. Otherwise its intended meaning (there are <a href="http://www.thisdayinquotes.com/2011/01/eternal-vigilance-is-price-of-liberty.html">many variations and many attributions</a>; I am going to go out on a limb and suggest that most who are presumed to have uttered the words have something in line with my meaning in mind) will become so bastardized as to be rendered irrelevant. <br />
<br />
<br />
Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-84598886338324931912013-10-10T07:00:00.000-04:002013-10-10T07:00:02.222-04:00Two Very Different Perspectives on the IPCC Climate Change ReportThe UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) recently released its fifth report on climate change. From <em><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marcia-g-yerman/ipcc-report-manmade-climate_b_4031507.html">The Huffington Post</a>:</em><br />
<em></em><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"Since 1988, the IPCC has been compiling reports (this is the fifth) documenting the physical science behind climate change. In essence, it measures the extent and severity of global warming and its attendant impacts, and analyzes it alongside the global response to the problem.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Scientists work in tandem on the report; findings are collected based on group consensus. The science community studies articles on topics covering a continuum of subjects, including the impact of <a href="http://www.momscleanairforce.org/extreme-weather-ebook/" target="_hplink">extreme weather</a> occurrences (floods and droughts) on world poverty and hunger. The goal is to help shape international policy based on the substantiated data. The report is broken down into four components:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
• The science of climate change<br />• Reports on the impacts of climate change <br />• Ways to moderate climate change<br />• A summation and integration of the previous three topics</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The conclusions showed that there is no doubt about the reality of climate change; it is caused by human action. Directive: Immediate response is essential. Sea levels are rising, sea ice is declining, oceans are acidifying, and precipitation patterns are changing. There will be more severe floods, storms and droughts."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
While the report has provoked a lot of responses, there have been two in particular which have caught my eye. One was <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2436551/A-weatherman-breaks-tears-vows-NEVER-fly-grim-climate-change-report.html">tears</a>, the other <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2013/09/29/top-mit-scientist-un-climate-report-is-hilariously-flawed/">laughter</a>. Tears of a clown anyone?</div>
Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-32782618344228469192013-10-09T06:30:00.000-04:002013-10-09T06:30:00.810-04:00Live from LebanonLong-time readers may perhaps be familiar with the blog NOW. which covers social and political issues in the Middle East. Co-founder Anthony Elghossain recently sent his readers (including me) an email blast highlighting some of the stories he has been working on. Anyone who is interested can check out his note, as well as the highlighted posts, below.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span id="goog_1696589525">Dear friends,<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">I
hope this finds you well during these particularly troubling times.
Because many of you are busy with events in the Levant, or are being distracted
by events in the Levant despite your efforts to 'Keep Calm and
Keep A Job,' I'll keep it short and sweet. For this
month's, please see below:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<ul type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; tab-stops: list .5in;"><strong><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Syria:</span></strong><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> <o:p></o:p></span></li>
<ul type="circle">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo1; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; tab-stops: list 1.0in;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><a href="http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/menasource/syria-s-war-and-washington-s-drama-the-path-to-policy"><span style="color: blue;">The
Path to Policy? Syria's War and Washington's Drama</span></a> (Atlantic Council
MENASource, assessment of Obama's approach to Syria);<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo1; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; tab-stops: list 1.0in;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><a href="https://now.mmedia.me/lb/en/diasporadiaries/the-devils-advocate-mr-assad-call-your-cleric"><span style="color: blue;">The
Devil's Advocate: Mr. Assad, call your cleric</span></a> (NOW, engagement
letter to Assad);<o:p></o:p></span></li>
</ul>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; tab-stops: list .5in;"><strong><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">'Diaspora Diaries' </span></strong><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">(NOW): In sequence, this
continue from 'Beirut Bug'...<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<ul type="circle">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo1; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; tab-stops: list 1.0in;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><a href="https://now.mmedia.me/lb/en/diasporadiaries/back-in-beirut-luggage-parking-the-scent-of-return"><span style="color: #0066cc;">Back in Beirut: Luggage, parking, the scent of
return</span></a> (Funny, I hope)<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo1; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; tab-stops: list 1.0in;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><a href="https://now.mmedia.me/lb/en/diasporadiaries/survival-of-the-species-diaspora-daddies-beiruts-women-and-the-pas-mal-test"><span style="color: blue;">Survival
of the Species: Diaspora Daddies, Beirut's women, and the 'pas mal' test</span></a>
(Funny, I hope. Easy ladies: the one on men comes out this month!)<o:p></o:p></span></li>
<li class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-list: l0 level2 lfo1; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; tab-stops: list 1.0in;"><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><a href="https://now.mmedia.me/lb/en/diasporadiaries/the-beirut-bombs-dying-and-dancing-in-the-eye-of-the-storm"><span style="color: #0066cc;">The Beirut Bombs: Dying and Dancing in the Eye of
the Storm</span></a> (Tragic/Necessary/Inevitable)<o:p></o:p></span></li>
</ul>
</ul>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">As
always, your thoughts are most welcome... I hope to see you soon.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Best
wishes,<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;">
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">-
Anthony<o:p></o:p></span></div>
Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-64515828975502217902013-10-08T06:30:00.000-04:002013-10-08T06:30:02.165-04:00What Makes Work Rewarding?A friend of the site recently sent me a video clip of a TED speech by behavioral economist Dan Ariely. It is worth a watch for anyone who has had to navigate any bumpy roads in their professional life (and who hasn't?)<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" mozallowfullscreen="" scrolling="no" src="http://embed.ted.com/talks/dan_ariely_what_makes_us_feel_good_about_our_work.html" webkitallowfullscreen="" width="560"></iframe><br />Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-41600684468745469202013-10-07T06:30:00.000-04:002013-10-07T06:30:00.815-04:00Two Wrongs Don't Make a Right (or Left)Can police officers guarding closed national monuments be anything more than a shameless political stunt? For the skeptical, the following data points might be helpful. First, while I don't have first-hand knowledge, there were supposedly no armed guards on duty the last time there was a government shutdown. Nor are there typically multiple guards, on horseback or otherwise, congregated around the Lincoln Memorial. <br />
<br />
However, there have been officers on horseback in front of the Lincoln Memorial at least some of the time since the shutdown. In addition to these officers, who need to be paid and supervised, there were crews (which also cost money) putting up barricades all last week around various National Mall attractions. <br />
<br />
Some people call the government shutdown democracy in action under the premise that a minority has been able to hold up the governmental process. Others have derided the Tea Party contingent for putting everything from credit ratings to livelihoods in jeopardy. Even those of the latter persuasion will have to admit that spending money to prove a point when spending has supposedly been suspended is shameless and petty. Are there no grown-ups left in DC?<br />
<br />
Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-27046616377968331372013-10-07T06:00:00.000-04:002013-10-07T06:00:10.187-04:00Let's Give this Another Shot...It has certainly been a while since I posted anything of substance on this page. Indeed, this post, and those which will follow it, will mark my return from the longest layoff I have had since starting <em>Blawgconomics </em>- longer than pauses for final exams, moving, starting new jobs, taking the bar, or any other of the roadblocks which life has placed before me.<br />
<br />
I cannot quite say why it has been so long since I have posted. I suppose a combination of work, some random adventures and plain old life have conspired against me. One thing that has most certainly not contributed is a lack of topics to write about; on the contrary, politicians behaving badly, the state of the economy (still) and geopolitical issues among other things have certainly provided enough fodder for a curmudgeon such as myself to pontificate on. <br />
<br />
I will do my best to post on a number of things that I have been mulling over throughout week. In sitting down to begin that process, I can say that it feels good to be back. Typing at a laptop might not capture the nostalgist's imagination like putting quill to parchment, but there is a familiarity in embarking upon a series of posts which I have missed and which comforts me, like rekindling an affair with an old paramour. I hope readers enjoy the resurgence as much as I do...Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-54058695129138969212013-07-31T09:08:00.005-04:002013-07-31T09:08:59.069-04:00I'll Be Back Soon...To the extent that I have a consistent enough readership base that people notice when I haven't posted in a while (I know there are a few of you) it has likely become apparent that I have been focusing on other endeavors in recent weeks. Quite simply my real job has been taking up a lot of my free time in addition to my regular hours. However I have a few posts in the queue and plan on publishing again soon. <br />
<br />
In short, please keep checking in - there will be new content up within a few days. Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-54799525562424770892013-07-12T09:53:00.001-04:002013-07-12T09:53:56.057-04:00Old Thoughts on Zimmerman Still Apply...<em>It seems incredible for so many reasons that I <a href="http://blawgconomics.blogspot.com/2012/05/dual-critical-role-and-culpability-of.html">first published</a> the reprinted post below over a year ago...</em><br />
<em></em><br />
<strong>The Dual Critical Role and Culpability of the Media in State v. Zimmerman</strong> <br />
<br />
After it was widely reported last week that George Zimmerman had posted bail and
would be free while waiting for his trial to begin, <a href="http://www.blawgconomics.blogspot.com/2012/04/state-v-zimmerman-trial-documents.html"><span style="color: #8c4a3f;">I
resolved for the umpteenth time</span></a> 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.<br /><br />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. <br /><br />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. <br /><br />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 prosecution.
Once the prosecution elected to forego the opinion of a grand jury and went
directly to pretrial with a <a href="http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/probable_cause_affidavit.pdf"><span style="color: #8c4a3f;">second
degree murder charge</span></a>, 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. <br /><br /><a href="http://www.blogger.com/null" name="more"></a>At
least some of what has developed to this point in the case can be attributed to
the role of the media in making sure the story made it to the public eye.
Without media coverage of the Justice for Trayvon movement, the story likely
would have died. This clearly would have been a negative for our society and our
justice system if it is found that Zimmerman acted outside the law. This is a
point which is critical, and I hope that nothing I write suggests that I don't
believe the media should have reported on this case. <br /><br />However, it is my
opinion that the media did more than report in this situation and I am still
left wondering if the media's involvement in the case has hindered justice or
helped it. I haven't been to Florida since the shooting, but my sense is that
opinions in this case vary widely with a gap that only became more pronounced as
the media inserted itself into the debate. If Martin was entirely innocent, and
the Skittles and iced tea image is the correct one, certainly jurors who would
want to believe otherwise will now have phantom gashes-on-the-back-of-the-head
to grasp onto. Conversely, even if Zimmerman was justified under Florida law in
protecting himself, there are those who will be certain to convict him anyway,
remembering pre-trial, quietly recanted <em>Today Show</em> videos which
seemingly proved racism.<br /><br />As is often the case in our hyper-polarized
society, these very different versions of the story were available depending on
whether one chose to receive their news from the peacock or the fox. Of course
this isn't a new phenomenon, it is just one more in a parade of situations where
the media has drifted away from traditional standards of reporting facts as
facts and speculation as speculation, or not at all. Aside from shunting aside
standards of ethical journalism, this could have some real world
implications.<br /><br />I don't know who was at fault for Trayvon Martin's
shooting. As I am not a Florida resident, there is no possibility that I will
have to decide. However the Floridians who do have to make some very difficult
decisions about what justice means in this case will have to do so after being
barraged with 'facts' from the media for almost a quarter of a year. The media,
on both sides of the debate, has exerted a type of power which means that they
might have a significant say over the outcome of this situation. And that is
unfortunate for all Americans who truly care about justice. Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-86265229114600109552013-07-12T09:37:00.001-04:002013-07-12T09:37:11.493-04:00Morris On Immigration<em>Long-time readers may remember a series of <a href="http://blawgconomics.blogspot.com/2011/11/war-on-drugs-dans-la-satire.html"> video guest posts</a> on the Drug War that I posted on behalf of friend of the site Rob Morris. Mr. Morris is back, this time with his thoughts on immigration:</em><br />
<em></em><br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/lYwgLa4R5XQ" width="560"></iframe><br />Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-61658731916881579352013-07-12T09:19:00.004-04:002013-07-12T09:19:35.983-04:00NoCo, Or: The Fifty First StateFrom <a href="http://denver.cbslocal.com/2013/07/09/effort-to-create-new-state-called-north-colorado-grows/">CBS News in Denver</a>:<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<strong>"</strong>There’s a growing effort to create a 51st state out of parts of northeast Colorado.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Ten counties, including Weld and Morgan, started talking about seceding last month. Now some people Lincoln and Cheyenne counties say they want to join a new state they’d call “North</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Colorado.”</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Organizers of the secession effort say their interests are not being represented at the state Capitol. Representatives from the 10 counties held a meeting on Monday in the town of Akron in Weld County to begin mapping the boundaries for the new state they say will represent the interests of rural Colorado."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
This isn't the first state secessionist movement I have ever heard of, nor will is it likely to be the last. However, it does seem that, during an era of hyper-partisanship, splits might become more likely (if still relatively unlikely) to actually occur. We will be keeping an eye on this one...</div>
Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-47341748154866076362013-07-12T07:00:00.000-04:002013-07-12T11:55:24.400-04:00More on Organ Harvesting<em>Yesterday I published <a href="http://blawgconomics.blogspot.com/2013/07/organ-situation-and-reminder-of.html">a post</a> on a near-miss intended organ harvesting and re-published a post on the perverse incentives inherent in the harvesting process. In doing so, I initially forgot that I had published more on this topic in the past. First published </em><a href="http://blawgconomics.blogspot.com/2012/09/organ-donation-linked-case-provides.html"><em>here</em></a><em>, reprinted in full below:</em><br />
<br />
Earlier this year, <a href="http://blawgconomics.blogspot.com/2012/03/organ-donations-and-freedom-of-choice.html"><span style="color: #8c4a3f;">I
wrote about</span></a> the perverse incentive created by the organ donation system in
America whereby some in the medical industry had an economic interest
in declaring individuals brain dead, possibly before all hope was lost, to make
harvesting of still-living organs possible. While some health care professionals
expressed to me that such a scenario was <a href="http://blawgconomics.blogspot.com/2012/03/organ-donations-revisited.html"><span style="color: #8c4a3f;">incredibly
unlikely</span></a> due to certain safeguards, allegations arising out of a recent
court case, if true, would suggest that is unfortunately not the case. From the
<em><a href="http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/organ_ghouls_of_doom_suit_LxCZMP5uRGgI6yn3ywMN9J"><span style="color: #8c4a3f;">New
York Post</span></a>:</em><br />
<br />
"The New York Organ Donor Network pressured
hospital staffers to declare patients brain dead so their body parts could be
harvested — and even hired “coaches” to train staffers how to be more
persuasive, a bombshell lawsuit charged yesterday.<br />
<br />
The federally funded nonprofit used a “quota”
system, and leaned heavily on the next of kin to sign consent forms when
patients were not registered as organ donors, the suit charged.<br />
<br />
“They’re playing God,” said plaintiff Patrick
McMahon, 50, an Air Force combat veteran and nurse practitioner who claims he
was fired as a transplant coordinator after just four months for protesting the
practice."<br />
<br />
While these allegations have yet to be proven, and
while it should be remembered that this is a wrongful termination suit, not a
case investigating these allegations themselves, such a situation, if true, is
absolutely mortifying. <br />
<br />
While the current system is set up to avoid one
perverse incentive - individuals and their family members are not allowed to
profit on organ donations, avoiding scenarios where people would sell
their organs purely for profit* - it has seemingly led to another as hospitals
<em>are </em>allowed to make money on donated organs. And while medicine is
often (and often rightly) noted as a noble profession, that does not mean that
all who work in the profession are noble. <br />
<br />
There are many facts which need to be uncovered in
this case. However, it seems unfortunately likely that it is a perfect example
of what can happen when the law puts the wrong incentives in the wrong hands.
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="font-size: xx-small;">*If push came to
shove, I would probably argue that this isn't even necessarily a perverse
incentive, but rather freedom of choice followed by suitable compensation. At
the very least, families getting a check for their loved one's self-chosen
sacrifice would seem far superior to the outcome described here.</span> </div>
Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-17812491072916880382013-07-12T06:00:00.000-04:002013-07-12T09:14:51.218-04:00A Fun Message Board......for economics geeks can be found<a href="http://www.econjobrumors.com/"> here</a>. Economics Job Market Rumors is kind of like a pared down, econ-focused, reader-driven <em>Above the Law</em> for readers who are familiar with that blog. And, it is a perfect page to visit on a summer Friday...Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-60840535900332553092013-07-11T07:00:00.000-04:002013-07-12T09:39:49.233-04:00The Age of Wisdom<em></em><br />
I had the pleasure of spending time recently with an admirable and precocious, if slightly impatient, teenager. Doing so made me think about the differences (and relationships) between intelligence, curiosity, maturity and wisdom. <br />
<br />
Intelligence is the ability to take in information, remember it, think about it, and see how it fits with other information one has received. It is perhaps innate, but can undoubtedly be nurtured and fostered. <br />
<br />
Curiosity helps with this nurturing and fostering of intelligence, and can also be driven by it. It drives one to seek more information, learn about the world around them, and start to question why things are the way they are. It can also drive one to seek new information when information taken in and remembered using intelligence doesn't seem quite right.<br />
<br />
Maturity allows one to think about the world through the lens of experience. While in some, it might set one in their ways, blunting the valuable tool of curiosity, it can also lead to questioning in its own right. It is seeing the world through ones own eyes as well as the eyes of the others they have learned with, loved, disagreed with and looked up to. <br />
<br />
Wisdom is, I think, that rare combination of all of the above; the intelligent person who continues to question things and has the maturity to understand that opinions are not facts, and are meant to be evaluated, developed, shaped and reshaped. <br />
<br />
Or at least I assume it is. I would like to think I have just enough wisdom to admit that I don't have a perfect definition of what it is quite yet...Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-35600251411432445002013-07-11T06:30:00.000-04:002013-07-12T11:54:37.542-04:00Organ Harvesting and a Reminder of the Perverse Incentive Effect<em>From </em><a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Health/patient-wakes-doctors-remove-organs/story?id=19609438#.Ud1qjGrD_IV"><em>ABC News</em></a><em>:</em><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"It was exactly midnight when Caroline Burns eerily opened her eyes and looked at the operating lights above her, shocking doctors who believed she was dead and were about to remove her organs and donate them to patients on the transplant waiting list.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The <a href="http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2013/07/st_joes_fined_over_dead_patien.html" target="external">Syracuse Post-Standard</a> unearthed a <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/148583905/U-S-Centers-for-Medicare-and-Medicaid-Services-report-on-St-Joe-s" target="external"> report from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services </a> that chronicled the series of errors that led to the near-organ removal on a living patient at St. Joseph's Hospital Health Center in Syracuse, N.Y., in 2009. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"The patient did not suffer a cardiopulmonary arrest (as documented) and did not have irreversible brain damage," the HHS report concluded. "The patient did not meet criteria for withdrawal of care."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
According to the report, doctors had inaccurately diagnosed Burns with irreversible brain damage and ignored nurses who'd noticed signs that Burns was improving: She curled her toes when touched, flared her nostrils and moved her mouth and tongue. She was also breathing on her own even though she was on a respirator."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<em>While I certainly don't want to make accusations without a foundation, it does nonetheless remind me of an old story I posted on this site, first published <a href="http://blawgconomics.blogspot.com/2012/03/organ-donations-and-freedom-of-choice.html">here</a> and reprinted in full below:</em><br />
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a name='more'></a>According to <em><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204603004577269910906351598.html"><span style="color: #8c4a3f;">The
Wall St. Journal</span></a>,</em> organ transplantation is a $20 billion per year
business. The article linked to above goes on to note that, "Average recipients
are charged $750,000 for a transplant, and at an average 3.3 organs, that is
more than $2 million per body. Neither donors nor their families can be paid for
organs." In other words, these procedures are big business for the hospitals
where they occur.<br />
<br />
Which may lead some to wonder if there are any inherent
conflicts in the donor process. Of course, when you tell your friendly local
registry of motor vehicles that you will volunteer as a donor, that is a
conscious decision (unless some states I am not aware of have an opt-out as
opposed to an opt-in process). However, when the actual time comes for the
donation to occur, what decisions are made then? <br />
<br />
Readers might be
surprised by this question as many individuals assume that organ donations only
occur once the donor, and the freedom of choice along with them, has
expired. However, it turns out that as organs begin to lose their efficacy
shortly after their host has expired, it is actually better to harvest organs
from individuals who have not yet fully died. In other words, individuals
who are on life support. Most such individuals have had severe brain trauma, and
would not be able to function without the support of various machines, but they
nonetheless serve the purpose of keeping organs viable. <br />
<a href="http://www.blogger.com/null" name="more"></a><br />
Without diving into the semantics jungle surrounding the word
'alive,' at least some of our readers might nonetheless find it disturbing that
some research has noted that certain patients who have been technically
brain dead have re-acquired the ability to breath on their own. There are also
some indications that brain wave activity can restart after a period of
inactivity. Therefore, there is at least some chance that people who are
classified as medically dead for the purposes of harvesting are not fully past
any hope. Leading back to the question posed above with regards to choice.
<br />
<br />
While I will admit that I am no doctor, and therefore cannot begin to
claim that I understand the sometimes fine line between life and death, the
facts noted above struck me as a bit odd. It strikes me that others might feel
the same for a variety of reasons, many of them personal, such as religion.
Others might have no hesitation about being donors, particularly, it would seem,
folks with iron-clad do not resuscitate orders in place.<br />
<br />
However, when
the fact that the very institutions which profit off of organ donation are
making decisions about whether patients are 'dead' or 'alive' is factored in, it
merely makes the analysis more complicated. While it is not my goal to
discourage organ donation, this may at least provide some food for thought
heading into the weekend.<br />
<br />
<em><span style="font-size: xx-small;">Tip of the
hat to S.W.</span></em> </div>
Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-49592168177115663122013-07-10T09:48:00.000-04:002013-07-10T09:48:07.299-04:00SCOTUS Approval Ratings Leave Something to Be Desired...Or Do They?Despite of, or maybe because of, recent events, Americans' approval of the Supreme Court is currently at an all-time low. <a href="http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/supreme_court_update">From Rasmussen</a>:<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"The U.S. Supreme Court finished its term with big decisions on voting rights, affirmative action and same-sex marriage. Following those rulings, public approval of the court has fallen to the lowest level ever recorded in more than nine years of polling. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 28% believe the Supreme Court is doing a good or an excellent job. At the same time, 30% rate its performance as poor. That’s the highest-ever poor rating. It’s also the first time ever that the poor ratings have topped the positive assessments. Thirty-nine percent (39%) give the court middling reviews and rate its performance as fair. (To see survey question wording, <a href="http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/questions/pt_survey_questions/june_2013/questions_supreme_court_june_28_29_2013" target="_self">click here</a>.) </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
These numbers are even weaker than the numbers recorded following the Supreme Court ruling upholding the president’s health care law last year."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
At first blush, and to the extent that the Supreme Court is supposed to reflect the values of the nation in its decisions, it would appear that the body is doing a poor job. <br />
<br />
However, it may also be that it is doing a good job reflecting the majority on some specific topics (gay marriage, affirmative action) that happen to be the very topics that generate very strong opinions on either side of the political spectrum. Therefore, the Court could be reflecting the will of the majority while simultaneously providing fodder for majority dissatisfaction; in the current political environment, it isn't surprising that people would grasp more on decisions they disagree with than those they favor.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Another theory could be that the Supreme Court is making decisions it believes are just that are nonetheless unpopular with the public, and therefore would be difficult for politicians to act on. While this post isn't meant to address judicial activism, or the exact role of the courts, it is undoubtedly true that one of the reasons that Justices are not elected officials is so that they may interpret the law without subjecting themselves to the winds of national opinion. Therefore, they could well be doing their job without following the majority.<br />
<br />
Some might give the Nine the benefit of the doubt and just go with the theory that they are following precedent without considering the national mood at all. Or maybe this is all as simple as everything coming out the way Justice Kennedy wants it to (though there were some interesting combinations of Justices forming majorities in some of the recent cases). Or maybe they are all being influenced by their own politics. Or maybe it is some combination of everything above. <br />
<br />
Adding in the fact that the individual Justices don't all have the same motivations or styles, and the permutations quickly become too much for a legal, rather than a mathematical, mind to follow. <br />
<br />
Of course, some polling on national opinions could help here (albeit slightly; while it could give data points on majority opinions, it wouldn't give us insights into how the Justices thought about those majority opinions, or if they believed them to be majority opinions, or if they even cared about them), but my intent in this post is to focus more on what the Court has actually done, how it can be interpreted, and why people may be viewing it so unfavorably. Indeed, what people believe about the Court, its role, and its motivations might be shaping opinions just as much, or more so, than any particular opinion. <br />
<br />
In that endeavor, I have perhaps failed, as I haven't quite come to a definitive answer. And I would suspect that, if the question were put to them, the Nine would simply say that they decided based on their interpretations of the law - therefore we may never know what happened this term. In any case, the term has been an interesting one. And it is difficult to argue that the Court has been particularly partisan given its decisions. In this day and age, that is notable in and of itself...</div>
<br />Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-7088418706105346212013-07-08T10:12:00.002-04:002013-07-08T10:12:47.817-04:00The Snowden Support Age GapI am often critical of fact finding, statistical analysis and polls, all of which can be heavily impacted by sample size, the questions used, the individual reporting the results etc. I am also typically wary of anecdotal 'data' for some of the same reasons and more. All that said, and relatively small sample size aside, I found it striking recently that, at a social gathering composed of intelligent, educated, thoughtful people of various political stripes, the main factor separating how people viewed the actions of Edward Snowden was age. <br />
<br />
Very roughly, it appears that those from their late teens/early twenties to their late thirties were more inclined to view Snowden (or at least his actions) favorably. The general theme was that they appreciated that he had brought to light some governmental activities that many people of the age group had already suspected. Their parents' generation (and theirs) had a different outlook. Words like traitor were thrown around almost carelessly given the penalty that can result from a legal action based on the claim. The general theme seemed to be that, in a post-9/11 world, that discussing the espionage techniques and capabilities of the country put people at risk.<br />
<br />
For some time, I couldn't necessarily figure out why the difference existed. After all, those in their fifties and sixties will have recalled the Watergate scandal, the core of which was domestic espionage, albeit between political parties (although many have noted that Snowden's actions could easily be classified as political in the way he intended them). While it is true that break-ins and cover-ups figured heavily in that chapter of history, it is also true that the focal point of all of those actions was domestic spying. <br />
<br />
However, after a while, I began to formulate an opinion on why the age gap existed. At least for some, it may have more to do with how the younger generation uses technology - and therefore better understands the implications of that use - compared with how their parents use it. <br />
<br />
Twenty- and thirty-somethings went to class not with notebooks made of paper, but of circuits. They are more likely to find life mates (or at least mates for the weekend) on the internet. Naughty trysts and rather embarrassing nights out that used to happen under cover of darkness behind bleachers, in back seats and in the less conspicuous corners of bars are now memorialized with photo evidence for all the world to see. Medical records that used to be locked in a file cabinet are now stored in databases. People can do more with their phones than supercomputers used to be able to accomplish. <br />
<br />
While their parents have adopted technologies as well, it is unclear (to this observer at least) that they can grasp just how much of the activity of their everyday lives is captured up in code. Meanwhile, younger people who have experienced everything from first date requests to bullying on the internet may have a much better understanding of what their digital footprint could be if all of those interactions were combed through and stored in a central location. <br />
<br />
There may, of course, be other factors. Those in their twenties and teens might not recall 9/11 with the same horror as older individuals. War weariness and poor economic conditions may have increased skepticism of the government in those whose friends and close relatives have had to deal more directly with both. Meanwhile, regardless of political affiliation, conservatism (with a small 'c'), and the trust in authority that often comes with it, tends to arise more broadly in those of a certain age.<br />
<br />
That said, knowledge of 'how the internet works' has seemed to make knowledge of how the information that flows through it can be (mis)used a lot more frightening.<br />
<br />
Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-76941887314369698012013-07-04T06:00:00.000-04:002013-07-04T06:00:05.903-04:00PSA: Restore the Fourth ReminderA <a href="http://blawgconomics.blogspot.com/2013/06/psa-restore-fourth.html">friendly reminder</a> for anyone who is interested:<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXHkUas3MIbfxOisBLU0Og2KUVpvxboV2-8Cgln1zG7cJTuCyS4GXxt3sl8OQTjXWCGnzU48ILy5J8eCTm-890pSCm1ZTNhm216-wMHvIhGh6p7Kk36Z3FMfQ6L9qwkqWwlIYaHVvsdto/s960/restorethefourth.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXHkUas3MIbfxOisBLU0Og2KUVpvxboV2-8Cgln1zG7cJTuCyS4GXxt3sl8OQTjXWCGnzU48ILy5J8eCTm-890pSCm1ZTNhm216-wMHvIhGh6p7Kk36Z3FMfQ6L9qwkqWwlIYaHVvsdto/s640/restorethefourth.jpg" width="494" /></a></div>
Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-5251007257721963392013-07-03T07:04:00.000-04:002013-07-08T11:43:43.153-04:00Posner on Healthcare CostsFor anyone interested in a thoughtful piece on the price of healthcare in the U.S., visit <a href="http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/2013/06/does-medical-care-cost-too-much-in-the-united-states-posner.html">here</a> for a recent post by Richard Posner. Interestingly, and unusually for him, Posner seems to be supportive of even more government regulation (albeit different regulation than exists currently) of the healthcare system as a means to get costs down. <br />
<br />
He gets to that point by emphasizing the market failures that exist as a result of imperfect information among patients. While there is, in my opinion, more to that when it comes to the healthcare system problems plaguing the nation, it is nonetheless an interesting perspective which is stimulating some interesting comments. Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-16142336733563765722013-07-02T07:57:00.000-04:002013-07-02T07:57:00.286-04:00Cold War Renewed?From <a href="http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/9392090/vladimir-putin-denies-stealing-new-england-patriots-owner-robert-kraft-super-bowl-ring">ESPN.com:</a><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"A spokesman for Vladimir Putin maintains that the Russian President received Robert Kraft's Super Bowl ring in 2005 as a gift and said the <a href="http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/ne/new-england-patriots">New England Patriots</a>' owner's claims that Putin took it without permission is "weird."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Kraft, who was honored at Carnegie Hall's Medal of Excellence gala at the Waldorf-Astoria on Thursday, told the crowd at the event that Putin took his Super Bowl XXXIX ring when the Patriots' owner visited St. Petersburg, Russia, in 2005, even though he released a statement at the time saying he gave the ring to Putin as a gift.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"I took out the ring and showed it to [Putin], and he put it on and he goes, 'I can kill someone with this ring,' " Kraft told the crowd, according to the New York Post. "I put my hand out and he put it in his pocket, and three KGB guys got around him and walked out."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
A spokesman for Putin, however, told CNN on Sunday that the ring was definitely given as a gift.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"What Mr. Kraft is saying now is weird," Dmitry Peskov told CNN. "I was standing 20 centimeters away from him and Mr. Putin and saw and heard how Mr. Kraft gave this ring as a gift.""</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
One of the most interesting things about this story is that I can see either version being true. On the one hand, you have a wealthy sports team owner who, requiring dinner party anecdotes on a very regular basis, might stretch the facts on occasion for a laugh. On the other hand, you have Vladimir Putin. </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Either way, it is nice to see this story generating more laughs than anything else; it wasn't so long ago that a story like this would have had people glancing nervously at doomsday clocks. Relations might be frosty between the U.S. and Russia at times (with the current Snowden deportation saga and Syria serving as prime examples) but given the preceding forty years, the past twenty haven't been so bad...</div>
Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-14621111063856933842013-07-01T08:50:00.001-04:002013-07-01T08:50:52.776-04:00Thinking About Surveillance Against a Watergate Sized BackdropFrom <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watergate">Wikipedia</a>:<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The <b>Watergate scandal</b> was a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_political_scandals_in_the_United_States" title="List of federal political scandals in the United States">political scandal</a> that occurred in the United States in the 1970s as a result of the June 17, 1972, break-in at the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_National_Committee" title="Democratic National Committee">Democratic National Committee</a> headquarters at the <a class="mw-redirect" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watergate_hotel" title="Watergate hotel">Watergate office complex</a> in Washington, D.C., and the Nixon administration's attempted cover-up of its involvement. The scandal eventually led to the resignation of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nixon" title="Richard Nixon">Richard Nixon</a>, the President of the United States, on August 9, 1974 — the only resignation of a U.S. President to date. The scandal also resulted in the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indictment#United_States" title="Indictment">indictment</a>, trial, conviction, and incarceration of forty-three persons, dozens of whom were Nixon's top administration officials.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The affair began with the arrest of five men for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watergate_burglaries" title="Watergate burglaries">breaking and entering into the Democratic National Committee (DNC) headquarters at the Watergate complex</a> on June 17, 1972. The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Bureau_of_Investigation" title="Federal Bureau of Investigation">Federal Bureau of Investigation</a> (FBI) connected cash found on the burglars to a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slush_fund" title="Slush fund">slush fund</a> used by the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_for_the_Re-Election_of_the_President" title="Committee for the Re-Election of the President">Committee for the Re-Election of the President</a>, the official organization of Nixon's campaign.<sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-congressional_quarterly_vol_1_1-0"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watergate#cite_note-congressional_quarterly_vol_1-1">[1]</a></sup><sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-smoking_gun_tape_2-0"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watergate#cite_note-smoking_gun_tape-2">[2]</a></sup> In July 1973, as evidence mounted against the president's staff, including testimony provided by former staff members in an investigation conducted by the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_Watergate_Committee" title="United States Senate Watergate Committee">Senate Watergate Committee</a>, it was revealed that President Nixon had a tape-recording system in his offices and he had <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon_White_House_tapes" title="Nixon White House tapes">recorded</a> many conversations.<sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-3"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watergate#cite_note-3">[3]</a></sup><sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-4"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watergate#cite_note-4">[4]</a></sup></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Recordings from these tapes implicated the president, revealing he had attempted to cover up the questionable (and illegal) goings-on that had taken place after the break-in.<sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-smoking_gun_tape_2-1"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watergate#cite_note-smoking_gun_tape-2">[2]</a></sup><sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-5"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watergate#cite_note-5">[5]</a></sup> After a protracted series of bitter court battles, the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States" title="Supreme Court of the United States">U.S. Supreme Court</a> unanimously ruled that the president had to hand over the tapes to government investigators; he ultimately complied.</div>
<br />
While granting that the surveillance programs that were leaked by Ed Snowden recently are legal under current U.S. law, I nonetheless find it striking that perhaps the biggest political scandal in U.S. history was rooted in such activities happening on a far smaller scale. I guess it is a step in the right direction that current surveillance activities, being rooted in digital surveillance, have at least rendered the break-in part unnecessary.<br />
<br />
I also find it striking that the outrage that was exhibited over that surveillance, and the subsequent cover-up, has not made as much of an appearance during the current scandal. I suppose people get the government they deserve...Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-64996456393680335232013-06-28T09:51:00.000-04:002013-07-08T11:40:40.109-04:00Maybe I Was Wrong on Inflation?While the American economy is far from booming right now (think real unemployment, wage growth, inflation, asset prices, etc.) it is nonetheless as a casual observance no longer 'in the tank'. Because of both statistical and anecdotal data points, I have been thinking a lot lately about how wrong I must have been when I predicted disaster after it became clear a few years back that the continuous printing of money was just about the only arrow left in the Fed's quiver.<br />
<br />
For those who are familiar with Paul Krugman and his theories (and terminology) I was an 'Austerian' who just didn't understand economics enough, or more sinfully, did understand it, but was applying the wrong models. Meanwhile, the Keynesian Krugman has maintained for a few years that printing money in the economic environment America was (and to some extent is) in is just fine, and that inflation would not necessarily be the natural corollary. In a little bit of a victory dance given the backdrop discussed above, Krugman published a post about those crazy people who shared my austerity <a href="http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/16/inflation-nation-not-2/?_r=0">viewpoint recently</a> (not for the first time of course). <br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<em>Basically, many people on the right had and have a supply-side view of the slump. This comes in different versions: there’s the view that unemployment benefits and Obamacare are reducing labor supply; there’s the Austrian view that the bubble left us with the wrong capital structure; I suspect there are other versions I’m missing. But under any supply-side interpretation, the Fed’s decision to respond by trying to pump up demand, which it has done by vastly increasing the monetary base, ought to have been inflationary.</em></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<em>Of course it wasn’t — which is what people from my side of the argument predicted in advance, because we recognized that collapsing demand had pushed us into a liquidity trap in which the Fed’s problem was lack of traction, not inflation.</em></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<em>The disappointing thing is, as I’ve already suggested, that almost nobody has been induced by this dramatic failure of prediction — or the similar error on interest rates — to change views, and possibly even concede that the Keynesians might have a point.</em></div>
<br />
I am almost certain than Mr. Krugman is wrong in stating that almost nobody has changed views in light of the evidence. Specifically, I doubt he is a loyal Blawgconomics reader, as if he were he might know that I have been intellectually curious about what is (not) going on with inflation right now. And, that curiosity has led me to admit that, for now, Mr. Krugman is correct.<br />
<br />
I would like to think (actually, perhaps that is a poor choice of words as I do not hope ill on the American economy or its participants if for no reason other than the most selfish one - maybe I should say "I would 'expect'") that some day the chickens will come to roost, and that printing a bunch of money will cause problems, inflationary and otherwise. And it cannot really be denied that there have at least been some moral hazard issues created by printing money, as well as other governmental actions like bailouts, over the past few years.<br />
<br />
I would also like to point out that, in terms of the economic record, the past few years is, perhaps, not long enough to make a correct judgment on what the ultimate result of monetary policy actions, which are still in progress, will be. Maybe inflation has remained low because real unemployment has remained high. Maybe Chinese buying of dollars has helped to maintain a balance. Maybe we are still in the 'short run' and other 'runs' have yet to play out. <br />
<br />
However, there is a chance, as Mr. Krugman has always maintained, that everything will be just fine. The Fed could very well engineer a soft landing and recovery, inflation could remain in check, and the American economy may get through the Great Recession (which was significantly contributed to by that same Fed, albeit under different management, in an irony of ironies) with flying colors. If this scenario plays out, if the Bernanke actions of the past few years end up being wildly successful, I will either have to come up with a bunch of excuses for how extraneous factors came into play, how the dollar's hegemony shielded it from declines, etc., or else re-think some long-held beliefs. <br />
<br />
In any case for now, and for the record, the Krugmanites are, of course, undoubtedly correct. Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-23178688967597742152013-06-28T07:41:00.000-04:002013-07-08T11:41:15.467-04:00Biggest Shift in Civil Rights History?According to <em>Time </em>magazine, The Supreme Court marked its last day of work this session by facilitating one of the 'fastest civil rights shifts in the nation's history'. <a href="http://swampland.time.com/2013/06/26/in-landmark-ruling-supreme-court-strikes-down-defense-of-marriage-act/?iid=sl-main-lead">From </a><em><a href="http://swampland.time.com/2013/06/26/in-landmark-ruling-supreme-court-strikes-down-defense-of-marriage-act/?iid=sl-main-lead">Time</a>:</em><br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<em></em><br /></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: justify;">
"Seventeen years after a Democratic President signed a federal law defining <a href="http://topics.time.com/marriage/">marriage</a> as between a man and a woman, the U.S. Supreme Court struck it down on Wednesday, capping one of the fastest civil rights shifts in the nation’s history.</div>
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: justify;">
In a landmark 5-4 decision, the Justices ruled that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), passed by bipartisan majorities and signed by President Bill Clinton, is an unconstitutional violation of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution">Fifth Amendment</a>."</div>
<br />
Heady stuff...and more to follow on this page...Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7863581843088370950.post-27357192573206975692013-06-28T06:00:00.000-04:002013-06-28T06:00:12.334-04:00PSA: Restore the Fourth<em>Long time readers will know that one of the things I enjoy most about running this site is the opportunity it affords me to provide a forum for conversation. With that in mind, I am delighted to share (below) a marketing piece provided by a friend of the site, Summer Nazer, who is involved with an effort to protest government surveillance. For more information on the cleverly named 'Rally to Restore the Fourth', readers can visit </em><a href="http://restorethefourth.net/"><em>here</em></a><em>. If any readers would like to assist in the organization effort, they can visit </em><a href="http://reddit.com/r/restorethefourth"><em>here</em></a><em>.</em> <br />
<br />
<br />
<div>
<div>
<div style="font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; margin-bottom: 15px; text-align: center;">
<strong><span style="font-size: 20px;">Rally to Restore the Fourth in Washington D.C.</span></strong></div>
<div style="font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; margin-bottom: 15px; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: 18px;">“Freedom is Never More than One Generation Away from Extinction”</span></div>
<div style="font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; margin-bottom: 15px;">
<span style="font-size: 14px;">Washington D.C. (June 21, 2013) – This Fourth of July hundreds of concerned area residents will gather in McPherson Square to demand the restoration of the Fourth Amendment rights for all Americans. The event is part of a nationwide movement called Restore the Fourth. Rallies will take place in cities and towns across the country. A grassroots, non-partisan coalition of individuals came together online to organize the rallies after a whistleblower revealed a massive government spying program that records information about American citizens.</span></div>
<div style="font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; margin-bottom: 15px;">
<span style="font-size: 14px;"><strong> Rally to Restore the Fourth</strong></span><div style="line-height: 14px;">
<span style="font-size: 14px;"><strong> Date:</strong> <span class="aBn" data-term="goog_1793043911" tabindex="0"><span class="aQJ">July 4, 2013</span></span></span></div>
<div style="line-height: 14px;">
<span style="font-size: 14px;"><strong> Location:</strong> McPherson Square</span></div>
<div style="line-height: 14px;">
<span style="font-size: 14px;"><strong> Time:</strong> <span class="aBn" data-term="goog_1793043912" tabindex="0"><span class="aQJ">12:00 – 2:00 pm</span></span></span></div>
</div>
<div style="font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; margin-bottom: 15px;">
<span style="font-size: 14px;">“This is not just about whether or not you trust your government,” said event organizer Andrea O’Neill. “The Founding Fathers wrote protections into the Constitution so that no administration, an Obama Administration or a Joseph McCarthy Administration, could violate the rights of Americans. It is our obligation as citizens to defend the Constitution.”</span></div>
<div style="font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; margin-bottom: 15px;">
<span style="font-size: 14px;">Restore the Fourth stands with more than 80 internet companies and organizations that have signed on with <a href="http://nathanwhite.createsend1.com/t/t-l-zdtzk-krkjhjjk-e/" style="color: #2f82de; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank">StopWatching.us</a>. We call upon Congress to:</span></div>
<ol>
<li><div style="font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; margin-bottom: 15px;">
<span style="font-size: 14px;">Reform Section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act, the state secrets privilege, and the FISA Amendments Act to make clear that blanket surveillance of the Internet activity and phone records of any person residing in the U.S. is prohibited by law;</span></div>
</li>
<li><div style="font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; margin-bottom: 15px;">
<span style="font-size: 14px;">Investigate, report, and reveal to the public the extent of this domestic spying;</span></div>
</li>
<li><div style="font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; margin-bottom: 15px;">
<span style="font-size: 14px;">Hold accountable those public officials who are found to be responsible for this </span><span style="font-size: 14px;">unconstitutional surveillance.</span></div>
</li>
</ol>
<div style="font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; margin-bottom: 15px;">
<span style="font-size: 14px;">The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution:</span></div>
<div style="font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; margin-bottom: 15px;">
<span style="font-size: 14px;">"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."</span></div>
<div style="font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; margin-bottom: 15px;">
<span style="font-size: 14px;"></span> </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXHkUas3MIbfxOisBLU0Og2KUVpvxboV2-8Cgln1zG7cJTuCyS4GXxt3sl8OQTjXWCGnzU48ILy5J8eCTm-890pSCm1ZTNhm216-wMHvIhGh6p7Kk36Z3FMfQ6L9qwkqWwlIYaHVvsdto/s960/restorethefourth.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXHkUas3MIbfxOisBLU0Og2KUVpvxboV2-8Cgln1zG7cJTuCyS4GXxt3sl8OQTjXWCGnzU48ILy5J8eCTm-890pSCm1ZTNhm216-wMHvIhGh6p7Kk36Z3FMfQ6L9qwkqWwlIYaHVvsdto/s640/restorethefourth.jpg" width="494" /></a></div>
<div style="font-family: "Helvetica Neue",Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; margin-bottom: 15px;">
<span style="font-size: 14px;"></span> </div>
</div>
</div>
Josh Sturtevanthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00080334341099916281noreply@blogger.com0