Author Archives: ErickaFontenot

Did the Stagflation of the 70s Ever Exist In the First Place?

by ErickaFontenot Posted on May 9, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

In a conversation with Dean Baker recently, I learned something interesting. This won’t be new to anyone deeply familiar with inflation statistics, but it was new to me. Maybe it will be new to you too.

The general subject is the stagflation of the 70s, which ushered in supply-side economics and the Reagan era. More specifically, the issue is the measurement of inflation during part of this era. Housing costs are incorporated into the CPI by measuring rents, but prior to 1982 it was done by directly measuring the price of buying a house. In an era when interest rates were steady, this didn’t matter much, but when interest rates went crazy in the mid-70s it made a big difference, overstating inflation by about two percentage points. If you correct for this, and also take a look at exactly when the worst periods of stagflation occurred, you get this:

If you correct the inflation figures and account for the two oil shocks of the 70s, the period from 1970-85 looks remarkably steady. Inflation and GDP growth are both running at about 4 percent for nearly the entire time.

I don’t have the chops to relitigate this, but the question it raises is: Did stagflation ever even exist? Was there anything seriously wrong with the economy of the 70s other than a pair of oil shocks we had no control over? Would the economy have recovered normally after the second oil shock even if Paul Volcker hadn’t created a huge recession? Feel free to litigate in comments.

More here – 

Did the Stagflation of the 70s Ever Exist In the First Place?

Posted in alternative energy, FF, GE, LG, ONA, solar, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Did the Stagflation of the 70s Ever Exist In the First Place?

Trump Says His Controversial Comment About Abortion Was "Excellent"

by ErickaFontenot Posted on April 5, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump ignited a firestorm last week when he said that he wants to outlaw abortion and punish women who obtain abortions anyway. He soon clarified his comment, suggesting that women who get abortions should not be penalized. But most recently, he doubled down on his initial statement.

Here’s the chronology: During an interview with MSNBC’s Chris Matthews last Wednesday, Trump said that abortion should be banned and that “there has to be some form of punishment” for women who obtain abortions once they are outlawed. Faced with immediate criticism from both anti-abortion and pro-abortion rights groups, his campaign issued a statement saying that Trump believed that only the abortion provider, not the woman, should be held legally responsible.

But a few days later, on Saturday, Trump essentially reaffirmed his initial comments. His answer to Matthews’ question was “excellent,” Trump told talk radio host Joe Pags, in an interview flagged on Tuesday by the liberal website Right Wing Watch. Here’s the exchange:

TRUMP: A lot of people thought my answer was excellent, by the way. There were a lot of people who thought that was a very good answer. It was a hypothetical question. I didn’t see any big deal and then all of a sudden there was somewhat of a storm. And you know, it’s interesting, this morning I’m hearing two hosts on television that were critical and they said, “We really thought his first answer was very good.” Because you can’t win. “We thought it was good, what was wrong with his first answer?” And I heard a pastor, who is a fantastic pastor, saying, “Well, you know, if you think about it, his first answer was right”…

PAGS: Well, your answer was consistent with conservatism but Chris Matthews has an agenda, so I’m not even wondering about the question because I thought it was loaded and stupid and hypothetical.

TRUMP: It was disgraceful.

PAGS: Why go on the show? Why go?

TRUMP: I heard people defending it today. Now they defend it. Now they say, “It was really right.” The whole thing is just so—look, the press is extremely unfair.

Trump, though, was not done with this subject. The next day, he had yet another position on abortion. He appeared on CBS’s Face the Nation and stated that the current law on abortion should not be changed. Once again, his campaign had to renovate his message. It quickly walked back this statement, asserting that Trump meant the law will remain the same “until he is President.”

Read More: 

Trump Says His Controversial Comment About Abortion Was "Excellent"

Posted in alternative energy, Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, solar, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Trump Says His Controversial Comment About Abortion Was "Excellent"

7 Dishes Made Using Leftover Food

by ErickaFontenot Posted on February 27, 2016

The problem with leftovers is that it isn’t exactly exciting to eat the same thing three days in a row. However, this helpful infographic from Happy to Survivegives some clever ideas for reworking things from previous meals. Turn leftover oatmeal into pancakes and more. Not only will this excite your palate a bit more than just reheating food, but you’re doing the world a favor by creating less food waste.

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Visit site – 

7 Dishes Made Using Leftover Food

Posted in alo, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on 7 Dishes Made Using Leftover Food

Are Tea Partiers Really Less Willing to Compromise Than Extreme Lefties?

by ErickaFontenot Posted on June 27, 2014

Mother Jones

Ezra Klein writes today:

Hardcore conservatives agree with liberals on a lot. They just don’t want to compromise.

This is based on the Pew typology survey, which finds that “steadfast conservatives” oppose compromise by a 2:1 margin, while every other group favors compromise by at least a little bit. At the far left end of the spectrum, “solid liberals” favor compromise by 84-11 percent.

This is the same result that we’ve seen in lots of other surveys, and I sure wish someone would dig deeper into this. I can think of several questions:

Are folks on the far left really in favor of compromise? Or by “compromise” do they actually mean “the other side should back down in exchange for a few bones”?
Do extreme conservatives have good reason to be suspicious of compromise? A feeling of being sold out is a common trope on the right, but is it justified?
Are liberals in favor of compromise because they believe—correctly—that change is always incremental, which makes it sensible to accept an increment now in the sound belief that it will encourage a slippery slope toward further increments? (And likewise, are conservatives perfectly rational to oppose compromise for the same reason?)
In practice, when various real-world compromise positions are polled, are extreme liberals truly more willing to accept them than extreme conservatives?

You can probably guess that I’m a little skeptical of the entire notion that liberals are all sweetly willing to compromise. They certainly talk in a more conciliatory manner than tea partiers, and maybe in the end they really are more willing to swallow half a loaf. But I have my doubts. More research, please.

Read original article:  

Are Tea Partiers Really Less Willing to Compromise Than Extreme Lefties?

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Are Tea Partiers Really Less Willing to Compromise Than Extreme Lefties?