Tag Archives: francisco

"Cloud Atlas" Author David Mitchell: "What a Bloody Mess We’ve Made"

by DaleYbjrkf Posted on October 11, 2014

Mother Jones

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

British novelist David Mitchell is best known as the guy who wrote the great novel that was made into the challenging movie Cloud Atlas. Yet the screen fails to convey the true brilliance of Mitchell, who has been widely hailed as one of the English language’s best prose stylists. He so convincingly captures the patois of disparate characters that one might mistake him as the charismatic frontman for a creative writer’s guild.

Over a 15-year career, Mitchell has earned a cult following for the way his work seamlessly bridges historical, contemporary, and science fiction. Readers of his latest novel, The Bone Clocks, won’t be disappointed. It offers a genre spanning, multistranded narrative that begins in an English pub in 1984 and ends in 2043, when the oil runs dry and a war wages between bands of immortals.

On a recent drive together through San Francisco, the 45-year-old author told me about his “midlife crisis novel,” and why he’s not so confident about the survival of the human race.

Mother Jones: How does it feel to be back in San Francisco?

David Mitchell: It’s where I did my first solo book event ever in 1999. I was living in Japan. It was my first ever time in America, my first book event, first everything. Back then there was no one that wanted to meet me. So I did an urban hike, with trees and a steep hillside and these steps and ended up at the ocean. I had my first meal in a real American diner by the sea.

MJ: The architecture of your books involves interconnected novellas whose characters often turn up unexpectedly. Which comes first, structure or character?

DM: The structure is the attention grabber, and somewhat unusual, but emotional resonance should be something all novelists should want to create. If you don’t care about characters, you’ve got dead bodies on your hands.

For the same reason you can’t make yourself laugh by tickling yourself, you never actually know if you’ve achieved empathy for the character. I start by making the character want something and yearn for something—and what are the holes in their lives? That’s a key to making that bond with the reader. But I needed a theoretical place for the characters to go; they couldn’t all be there at once—which brings us back to structure.

MJ: There’s a musicality in your writing, an elegant single-mindedness. Is this a conscious effort?

DM: I think long and hard on each word, and then I’m revising, revising, revising. For me, and for a lot of writers, writing is mostly rewriting. And for me, at that level, if assonance and alliteration and dissonance feel right, then that’s what I do. I go with those words and not others.

MJ: Talk about your Bone Clocks protagonist.

DM: Holly’s an amalgam girl, a compilation girl, a mixtape girl. She’s pretty solidly working class, though in the middle era of her life she’s writing books. She’s rebellious, says no more than I ever did as a boy, more than I do now—with gay abandon even. My daughter’s not quite the right age yet, but any father of a daughter becomes more feminist than he was before. I hope this knowledge gives me a slightly different way of looking out.

MJ: Recently, you’ve thrown an interesting conceptual bone at the reader by suggesting that your novels all form one über-book, in which characters and themes may overlap and reoccur. If this book is part of a larger universe, then who are you still thinking about?

DM: Right now I think about Hugo, because I realize he’s out there, he’s aging. It’s the end of The Bone Clocks and he’s got the body of a 24 year old. He was born around the same time as me, in the late sixties, and I wonder what he’s up to. At the end of The Bone Clocks, he gets to have his thirties, when most of his contemporaries are in their 60s. He’s a future character.

MJ: Have you heard of the movement, popular among libertarians, called Transhumanism?

DM: Once the book is handed in, the characters are in cryogenic suspension. That belongs in that Transhumanist tradition, doesn’t it? With West Coast attitude, you can cheat death. In a strange way, it peculiarly belongs to the tradition of The Bone Clocks. Is it not a kind of a malady? Is it not indicative of our beauty-obsessed culture, equating being over 40 with being on the threshold of the old folks home? Stop feeling envious of beautiful, healthy young 20-year-olds—not a sideways envy, but a painful blade in the guts. That’s the enemy of the contemporary life, especially when you have other things to be dealing with in the domestic sphere.

MJ: Do you think we handle aging poorly?

DM: If you were an alien anthropologist studying a TV program, you wouldn’t be aware of anyone with white hair other than an occasional anchorman. Terror makes you profoundly age averse. We become sort of mean to seniors: “Why are you holding up my queue?” And so they venture out much less. Japan’s not much better. It’s a Confucian country where in theory they equate age with wisdom and not decrepitude, but you can’t survive as an old person in the middle of Tokyo—you’d get trampled. And so, you don’t see them.

MJ: The last section of your book presents a dim view of what’s to come for us humans. What do you think our future holds?

DM: I’m a country boy and I love trees. The World Without Us talks about how what a great benefit to the planet Earth, the disappearance of human beings would be. It would be lovely, in a really quick time frame—except the nuclear reactors. They, of course, are monstrous and melting for millennia to come, without a power grid to cool the water, to cool the nuclear waste. We’ve damned the planet by failing to keep a lid on radioactive waste. I see myself not just as a citizen of a state but also part of a life form and ecosystem: Humanity is a sentient life form with a wherewithal to be conscious, and what a bloody mess we’ve made.

MJ: Do you think technology could avert disaster?

DM: They can use a computer virus to deactivate Iran’s reactors but a virus can’t stop plutonium from being radioactive. The only way to stop it is not to synthesize the stuff in the first place, but it’s a bit late for that. The best thing about nature is what Agent Smith says in The Matrix: Humans spread and breed until the natural resources are used up, and then move on. What’s the only other life form that does this? The virus.

MJ: The immortals in the story, besides shedding light on our ageism, made me think about the relationship between resource scarcity and climate change. Care to elaborate?

DM: Resource wars can take religious guises or political guises but if there was enough going around none of them would happen. You’re in a drought in a pretty well functioning state, but imagine if you’re in a drought in a loose network of failed states and the place is awash with AK-47s. Gosh, this is getting to be a gloomy thing. But, overpopulation may usher in the Endarkenment. Civilizations do end. That’s why there are new ones. It’s a zero sum game.

At this, Mitchell leans back with a smile, and suggests a question: “What’s your fantasy air guitar solo?”

Read more: 

"Cloud Atlas" Author David Mitchell: "What a Bloody Mess We’ve Made"

Posted in Anchor, Casio, Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on "Cloud Atlas" Author David Mitchell: "What a Bloody Mess We’ve Made"

Inside the $7 Million Fight to Tax Soda in San Francisco

by SadyeMcGahan Posted on October 8, 2014

Mother Jones

After a high-profile battle in New York, the front line in the War on Soda has moved to Northern California: next month, voters in San Francisco and Berkeley will consider whether to levy major taxes on sugary beverages.

Measure D and Proposition E sound like ordinary, small-time municipal ballot items, but in the past few months, they’ve become subjects of national attention. For Big Soda, defeating the tax in the liberal, health-conscious Bay Area would be their ultimate triumph—and kill hopes for similar taxes in other places. The American Beverage Association—lobbying arm for Pepsi and Coca-Cola—has poured Super Big Gulp–sized streams of cash into these contests: they’ve spent $7.7 million thus far fighting San Francisco’s Proposition E alone. It’s already the second most expensive ballot measure campaign in the city, and could easily break the record.

Proposition E was proposed by San Francisco Supervisor Scott Wiener and it’d place a two-cent per ounce tax on sugary beverages. (Berkeley’s Measure D proposes a one-cent tax.) It’s specific about what constitutes a taxable sugary beverage: soft drinks, energy drinks, sports drinks and juices will be subject to the tax, while milk, syrups, and alcohol will be exempt. Distributors of the drinks are meant to cover the hikes, but they’re likely to pass that cost onto retailers, so consumers will end up paying the price. So, if you’re buying a 21-ounce Coke in the city, you can expect to pay 42 cents more. If Prop E passes, San Francisco would become the first city in the country to tax soda.

Supporters say all those Cokes will generate over $30 million in revenue per year, which would be used to fund nutrition, fitness, and other public health programs in public schools and elsewhere. Beyond that, it’s projected to reduce consumption of sugary drinks by 30 percent, according to San Francisco city economist Ted Egan. All in all, Prop E seems to have addressed some of the issues that made past soda taxes hard to swallow: In nearby Richmond, a measure was sunk because it didn’t specify what drinks could be taxed, and in El Monte, Calif., their bill didn’t specify how revenue would be allocated.

Though it’s arguably one of the best-crafted soda taxes to be put to vote, the Prop E campaign has been competitive, to put it lightly. Thus far, it’s been rife with deception and nasty attacks on both sides. Buoyed by its multi-million-dollar warchest, the No on E camp has blanketed the city with ads that evoke typical anti-nanny-state rallying cries. Big Soda has funded a group called Californians for Beverage Choice, which has put up signs and sent spokesmen on TV to argue that “consumers should be able to make the choice for themselves without taxes or regulation trying to influence their behavior.”

The No on E campaign also focuses on the high cost of living in San Francisco, calling the soda tax a “regressive tax” that would disproportionately hurt low-income people. The soda lobby has been leaning on another front group, the appealingly-named Coalition for an Affordable City, to make that case. It’s put up billboards across the city featuring local shopkeepers who oppose the measure, and sponsored TV ads like this one:

The San Francisco Bay Guardian investigated, however, and found that many of the 700-plus retailers who are listed as opponents of Prop E actually favor it. The Guardian claims that the beverage lobby allegedly dispatched canvassers to get local shopkeepers to oppose the tax, without mentioning exactly what it was, or that their businesses would be included on a public list. The Guardian also alleged that the groups endorsing a no vote—they appear during the ad—were paid off in exchange. “The Young Democrats, who endorsed No on the Sugary Beverage Tax, got a whopping $20,000 for their troubles,” it said.

The Yes on E coalition, led by a group called Choose Health San Francisco, has also accused the measure’s opponents of being deliberately dishonest. In a formal complaint to the San Francisco Ethics Commission, Choose Health said the No on E committee didn’t disclose how much money it has received, and has failed to add a disclaimer that the American Beverage Association has been funding their campaign. Michelle Parker, a PTA member and supporter of E, called the soda lobby’s tactics “personally offensive.” The opposition has denied wrongdoing, and spokesman Roger Salazar countered by accusing E’s supporters of “going around, harassing our supporters and bullying them.”

For some, it might be enough to look at the millions that Big Soda has (and will) spend, and conclude that Proposition E is doomed. While it’s true the lobby has a lot of money—and some of the best consultants in the business—the measure’s supporters are hardly a ragtag bunch. Backers have raised nearly $300,000—including $50,000 from billionaire donors Lisa and John Pritzker—which is enough to mount a competitive campaign. And the political consultancy firm Erwin & Muir—which boasts a 90% success rate, according to Politico—is working for the yes camp, pro bono.*

Proposition E will need to be approved by at least two-thirds of voters to become law. Polling has found support hovering around 50%, but it could receive a bump after the San Francisco Chronicle endorsed the measure last weekend. Things could easily get nastier as Election Day nears.

Even if it fails, many are betting that its cross-bay counterpart, Measure D, will succeed in Berkeley. Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich wrote that “If a soda tax can’t pass in the most progressive city in America, it can’t pass anywhere. Big Soda knows that, which is why it’s determined to kill it here.”

The measure’s passage might not spark a nationwide movement—the ABA’s Salazar was quick to say Berkeley is “not a precedent-setter”—but it’s dangerous enough that his bosses have spent over $2 million to stop the tax there. And it’s dangerous enough to have merited national attention. If both Prop E and Measure D fail, the idea of the soda tax may go flat for years. But if one of them passes, it could very well be coming to a ballot box near you.

Correction: An earlier version of this article incorrectly identified the name of the political consultancy firm.

Source – 

Inside the $7 Million Fight to Tax Soda in San Francisco

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Ultima, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Inside the $7 Million Fight to Tax Soda in San Francisco

Video: What We Saw Before Being Kicked Out of the SWAT Convention

by LonniePerron Posted on September 9, 2014

Mother Jones

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

This weekend, my colleague Prashanth Kamalakanthan and I attended Urban Shield, a first-responder convention sponsored by over 100 corporations and the Department of Homeland Security. The five-day confab included a trade show where vendors display everything from armored trucks to sniper rifles to 3D printable drones. (We documented a few of the more remarkable offerings here.) It also involved the largest SWAT training exercise in the world. Some 35 SWAT teams competed in a 48-hour exercise involving 31 scenarios that included ambushing vehicles, indoor shootouts, maritime interdiction, train assaults and a mock eviction of a right-wing Sovereign Citizens group. The teams came from cities across the San Francisco Bay area, Singapore, and South Korea and included a University of California SWAT team, a team of US Marines, and a SWAT team of prison guards.

But on Sunday, at a competition site near the Bay Bridge, our coverage was cut short. A police officer confiscated our press badges, politely explaining that his captain had called and given him the order. The captain, he said, told him we had been filming in an unauthorized location, though he could not tell us where that location was. (We’d been advised earlier that it was okay to film so long as we did not go on the bridge itself.) After several phone calls from both me and my editors, no one could tell us exactly what we had done wrong, but Sgt. J.D. Nelson, the public information officer for the Alameda County Sheriff’s Department (which hosts the Department of Homeland Security-funded event) made it clear that we could not have our passes back.

We’ll have a more in-depth report, and a lot more images and videos, in a few days.

View original post here:  

Video: What We Saw Before Being Kicked Out of the SWAT Convention

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Video: What We Saw Before Being Kicked Out of the SWAT Convention

The Faces of Outside Lands 2014

by NickolaHennessy Posted on August 12, 2014

Mother Jones

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

For the seventh straight year, the Outside Lands Music and Art Festival took over San Francisco’s Golden Gate Park this past weekend for an extravaganza of wine, beer, shopping, all manner of hip food, panel talks with chefs, and comedy shows. Oh, and there was also the music, increasingly just one draw in the overall festival experience. Thousands of party-seekers and music fans showed up for what was considered one of the most expansive—both in sheer size and range of offerings—OSL fests ever. It may not be a national event like Coachella, Bonnaroo, or Lollapalooza, but it didn’t lack big-name entertainers (Kanye West), rock legends (Tom Petty), or indie darlings playing afternoon sets. The attendees—200,000 in all—were locals and out-of-towners alike, old and young, costumed and non-costumed. We talked with some of them to get a sense of the pulse.

Kenny, server, San Francisco: “I just saw Big Freedia, and I’m originally from the South. It’s good to see Southern artists out here.” Prashanth Kamalakanthan

Dre, animal nurse, Oakland: “Outside Lands is definitely one of those things you love and you hate, because it’s so crowded, but the lineup is so good.” On her Pikachu suit: “My friends and I all have our own onesies. We roll phat.” Prashanth Kamalakanthan

Taylor, Adam, and TJ, from San Francisco: “I think we came more for the experience. Excited for Tycho, Boys Noize, Duck Sauce. And Macklemore. Everyone. I’m excited for everyone!” Prashanth Kamalakanthan

Robert, healthcare co-op owner, San Francisco: “It’s really different from my first concert, which was Woodstock in 1969, where there were no services whatsoever… I like the enthusiasm of the young folks who are here, it’s infectious!” Prashanth Kamalakanthan

Britney, student, Los Angeles: “I love wine. I’m like a wine connoisseur, and being able to be at a festival as a 21-year-old, on top of all the great music and art stuff, to be able to enjoy some wine as well is like the best thing.” Prashanth Kamalakanthan

Pearl, San Francisco, on this year’s crowd: “Way more biddies. Way more biddies. I think they oversold. I know they were trying to increase capacity—I think they succeeded.” Prashanth Kamalakanthan

Jenae and Summer, students, Burlingame, California: “It’s so much different from last year—there’s so many more people. It’s packed. The lineup was better last year, but it’s still equally fun. It’s like an experience, the whole vibe and everything.” Prashanth Kamalakanthan

Tom, business intelligence professional, San Francisco: “I live like three blocks away. I usually try to at least make one day a year since I’m so close. I just walk down the hill and I’m here. The lineup I wasn’t as impressed with, but it’s always a good time.” Prashanth Kamalakanthan

Ranjiv, an Outside Lands first-timer: “This festival is so nice. It’s so much better than all the other festivals. The people are so much better. The music is quality. I’m lovin’ it.” Prashanth Kamalakanthan

Michael, elementary school worker, Los Angeles: “I’m sticking around for Tom Petty. My mom is with me; she loves it. Gonna stick around for Flume—he’s my favorite artist—and catch a flight home in the morning.” Prashanth Kamalakanthan

Mika and Natalie, from Cupertino and New York City: “We’re here for the summer and thought it’d be cool to check this out.” Best thing they saw: “Two super happy bunny-costumed people plowing through the crowd.” Prashanth Kamalakanthan

Tessa, voter registration canvasser, on the hundreds signing up to vote at OSL: “It’s the really happy people, the people we want to have voting.” Prashanth Kamalakanthan

Jason, deliveryman, Atherton, California: “It’s definitely not as great as a lineup I’ve seen in the past. It’s definitely just as crowded. I just saw the improvised Shakespeare troupe. They were amazing.” Prashanth Kamalakanthan

Monty and his daughters, Portland: “It’s their first music festival. I’m corrupting them. So, you know what, their mom will complain forever because now they’re gonna love music festivals.” Prashanth Kamalakanthan

Kerry and Erin, from Reno and San Francisco, on their favorite sets: “Capital Cities was really good. Arctic Monkeys were really good, too. ” Prashanth Kamalakanthan

Read the article:

The Faces of Outside Lands 2014

Posted in alo, Anchor, Badger, Bunn, Everyone, FF, GE, Jason, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Faces of Outside Lands 2014

Observatory: Shipping Lanes Threaten Pacific Blue Whales

by Myrna Posted on July 28, 2014

Two major feeding grounds for the huge mammals are bisected by the routes of ships near seaports in San Francisco and Santa Barbara, Calif. See original:  Observatory: Shipping Lanes Threaten Pacific Blue Whales ; ;Related ArticlesDot Earth Blog: U.S. Coal Exports Eroding Domestic Greenhouse GainsPeter Marler, Graphic Decoder of Birdsong, Dies at 86Groups Press New York State to Ban Poisons That Kill Wildlife ;

Original article – 

Observatory: Shipping Lanes Threaten Pacific Blue Whales

Posted in alo, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, Monterey, ONA, solar, solar power, Uncategorized, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Observatory: Shipping Lanes Threaten Pacific Blue Whales

This GOP Regulator Questioned Energy Companies—So They Spent Almost $500,000 to Defeat Him

by NickolasPaz Posted on July 15, 2014

Mother Jones

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

Terry Dunn, a top Alabama utility regulator, is an EPA-bashing, fossil-fuel-boosting, dyed-in-the-wool Republican. Or so he thought. But last year, he tried to convince his colleagues on the three-member Alabama Public Service Commission to discuss lowering customer payments to Alabama Power, the state’s largest utility. Now he is the target of an unprecedented half-million dollar campaign, led by Alabama’s powerful coal lobby, to boot him out of office.

“I’ve been a delegate to the last three Republican presidential conventions,” Dunn says. “I’m about as Republican as my opponent—or more so. ‘Environmentalist’—in Alabama, that’s code to damage me. I’ve been fighting Environment Protection Agency regulation since the day I got into office.”

John Archibald, a political commentator for Al.com, agrees with Dunn’s self-assessment: “Dunn’s a good old boy. He asked hard questions, and kind of got punched for it.”

The energy industry’s chosen candidate is Chris “Chip” Beeker, a Republican challenging Dunn in the GOP primary. And there is no mistaking Beeker for an environmentalist: On his campaign website, Beeker claims the planet is cooling, not warming. “The so-called ‘climate change crisis’ is about as real as unicorns and little green men from Mars,” he says.

Beeker’s backers in Tuesday’s race include Drummond Co., a global coal giant headquartered in Birmingham, which has given him $50,000; R.E.M. Directional, a drilling company near Tuscaloosa that donated $20,000; and ENPAC, a political action committee connected to the Alabama Coal Association that gave him $38,000. Two trade groups, the Alabama Coal Association and Manufacture Alabama, have endorsed Beeker, and big-name Republicans, including former Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, have hosted fundraisers for him.

Beeker was the leading vote-getter in the first round of the primary, which was held on June 3, taking 39 percent to Dunn’s 33 percent. A runoff, scheduled for Tuesday, will determine the winner, as there is no Democrat running for the seat.

Dunn’s troubles started in January 2013, when he proposed holding a formal meeting to examine Alabama Power’s rates. The utility, which has a monopoly on the Alabama grid, charges customers more and has larger profit margins than utilities in surrounding states.

“From that point on, Dunn was declared an environmental wacko—and there is a concerted effort to paint him that way,” Archibald says. “But he’s not a tree-hugger. Under normal circumstances, you’d consider him far to the right.”

Dunn had antagonized the coal industry before he called for the meeting, by pushing utilities to increase their use of natural gas, a cheaper alternative to coal, in order to bring down energy prices. But proposing talks about rate reductions escalated the dispute. Coal miners filed ethics complaints against Dunn’s staff, and critics slammed him as a Republican in Name Only and environmentalist. Dunn tells Mother Jones that a man who identified himself as a private investigator—Dunn never found out who employed him—followed his car home from a commission meeting and photographed his chief of staff at home.

Dunn’s colleagues issued fiery, public denunciations of his proposal to consider cutting rates. Twinkle Cavanaugh, the commission president, said talking about rate reductions would allow “environmental extremist groups” to “trot out their fancy San Francisco environmental lawyers and junk science hucksters to make what amounts to a legal, judicial case against coal production within our borders.” She said Dunn’s proposal was orchestrated by environmentalists “hiding behind a curtain like the Wizard of Oz.”

The commission eventually held an informal meeting and approved changes to Alabama Power’s rate formula that Dunn denounced as weak.

To call Dunn’s proposal an attack on coal is preposterous, Archibald says—Alabama Power isn’t strictly a coal utility, and it imports a lot of coal from out-of-state. “But it seemed to work in getting the industry riled up,” he says. Utilities, such as Alabama Power, can’t spend money in Public Service Commission races. But energy wholesalers, including the companies lined up against Dunn, face no such restriction.

Dunn tells E & E News that some donors who previously supported him have abandoned him out of fear of industry backlash. He has not exactly made things easy on them: In February, he called for a bill to ban coal, gas, and electricity companies from donating to Public Service Commission candidates in future elections. The bill failed.

Alabama Power did not reply to requests for comment, but a spokesman previously told AL.com that the company had not become involved in the race. Beeker did not reply to messages left with his campaign and Beeker Catfish & Cattle Farms. Twinkle Cavanaugh, Drummond Company, Manufacture Alabama, and the Alabama Coal Association did not reply to requests for comment.

Originally posted here:  

This GOP Regulator Questioned Energy Companies—So They Spent Almost $500,000 to Defeat Him

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Oster, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on This GOP Regulator Questioned Energy Companies—So They Spent Almost $500,000 to Defeat Him

Republicans Love Obamacare!

by LorrieWolford Posted on July 10, 2014

Mother Jones

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

Here’s an additional tidbit from that recent Commonwealth Fund survey about Obamacare:

That’s a lot of Republicans who are satisfied with their Obamacare coverage. They might not realize it’s Obamacare—perhaps they know it as Kynect or Covered California—but they like it. And if you take it away, they’re going to be unhappy. That’s several million potentially unhappy Republicans if the national GOP continues its anti-Obamacare jihad. Just saying.

Continue reading: 

Republicans Love Obamacare!

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Republicans Love Obamacare!

Who’s Afraid of an Itsy Bitsy Bit of Inflation, Anyway?

by LydaMcCorkindal Posted on July 10, 2014

Mother Jones

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

Why are so many people obsessed with “hard money”? Why the endless hysterics about the prospect of inflation getting higher than 2 percent? Paul Krugman, like many others, thinks it’s basically a class issue. If you have a lot of debt, inflation is a good thing because it lowers the real value of your debt. But if you’re rich and you have lots of assets, the opposite is true. Here’s Krugman using data from the Census Bureau’s SIPP database:

Only the top end have more financial assets (as opposed to real assets like housing) than they have nominal debt; so they’re much more likely to be hurt by mild inflation and be helped by deflation than the rest.

Now, it’s true that some of these financial assets are stocks, which are claims on real assets. If we only look at interest-bearing assets, even the top group has more liabilities than assets.

But the SIPP top isn’t very high; in 2007 you needed a net worth of more than $8 million just to be in the top 1 percent. And since the ratio of interest-bearing assets to debt is clearly rising with wealth, we can be sure that the truly wealthy are indeed in the category where they have more to lose than to gain by a rise in the price level.

Brad DeLong isn’t buying it:

It is true that the rich do have more nominal assets than liabilities….But it is also true that America’s rich have a lot of real assets whose value depends on a strong and growing economy.

I find it implausible to claim that the net gain is positive when we net out the (slight) real gain to the rich from lower inflation with the (large) real loss to rich from lower capital utilization. It’s not a material interest in low inflation that we are dealing with here…

I don’t think I buy Krugman’s claim either. He’s basically saying that hard money hysteria is driven by the material interests of the top 0.1 percent, but even if you grant them the clout to get the entire country on their side, do the super rich really love low inflation in the first place? Do they own a lot of long-term, fixed-interest assets that decline in value when inflation increases? Fifty years ago, sure. But today? Not so much. This is precisely the group with the most sophisticated investment strategies, highly diversified and hedged against things like simple inflation risks.

Plus there’s DeLong’s point: even if they do own a lot of assets that are sensitive to inflation, they own even more assets that are sensitive to lousy economic growth. If higher inflation also helped produce higher growth, they’d almost certainly come out ahead.

So what’s the deal? I’d guess that it’s a few things. First, the sad truth is that virtually no one believes that high inflation helps economic growth when the economy is weak. I believe it. Krugman believes it. DeLong believes it. But among those who don’t follow the minutiae of economic research—i.e., nearly everyone—it sounds crazy. That goes for the top 0.1 percent as well as it does for everyone else. If they truly believed that higher inflation would get the economy roaring again, they might support it. (Might!) But they don’t.

Second, there’s the legitimate fear of accelerating inflation once you let your foot off the brake. This fear isn’t very legitimate, since if there’s one thing the Fed knows how to do, it’s stomp on inflation if it gets out of control. Nonetheless, there are plenty of people with a defensible belief that a credible commitment to low inflation does more good than harm in the long run. After all, stomping on inflation is pretty painful.

Third, there’s the very sensible fear among the middle class that high inflation is just a sneaky way to erode real wages. This is sensible because it’s true. There are several avenues by which higher inflation helps weak economies that are trapped at the zero bound, and one of them is by allowing wages to stealthily decline until employment reaches a new equilibrium. I think that lots of people understand this instinctively.

Fourth, there’s fear of the 70s, which apparently won’t go away until everyone who was alive during the 70s is dead. Which is going to be a while.

It’s worth noting that hard money convictions are the norm virtually everywhere in the developed world, even in places that are a lot more egalitarian than the United States. Inflationary fears may be irrational, especially under our current economic conditions, but ancient fears are hard to deal with. As it happens, the erosion of assets during the 70s was unique to the conditions of the 70s, which included a lot more than just a few years of high inflation. But inflation is what people remember, so inflation is still what they fear.

Bottom line: Even among non-hysterics, I’d say that hardly anyone really, truly believes in their hearts that high inflation would be good for economic growth. It’s the kind of thing that you have to convince yourself of by sheer mental effort, and even at that you’re probably still a little wobbly about the whole idea. It just seems so crazy. Until that changes, fear of inflation isn’t going anywhere.

Read more: 

Who’s Afraid of an Itsy Bitsy Bit of Inflation, Anyway?

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Who’s Afraid of an Itsy Bitsy Bit of Inflation, Anyway?

Pundits, Start Your Engines!

by Lubao2pzs Posted on July 10, 2014

Mother Jones

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

So what’s the next step in the border crisis? President Obama has introduced an emergency proposal; he’s traveled to Texas to discuss it with his political opponents; and in order to stem the tide of immigrants he’s declined to engage in photo-ops at the border that might encourage the tide to continue.

Republicans, for their part, appear at the moment to be completely unwilling to do anything at all.

So here’s the next step: a barrage of columns from our nation’s pundits acknowledging Republican intransigence but then insisting that, ultimately, the lack of action is Obama’s fault. Because leadership. Because LBJ. Because schmoozing. Because lecturing. Because relationships. Because political capital. Because great presidents somehow figure out a way to get things done. Rinse and repeat.

Continue reading – 

Pundits, Start Your Engines!

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Pundits, Start Your Engines!

Medicare Just Keeps Producing Great Budget News

by KatriceEvu Posted on July 9, 2014

Mother Jones

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

Medicare has been a bastion of good news lately. Every year, the CBO reduces its baseline estimate of Medicare costs, which have dropped by more than $1,000 since 2010. So what’s going on? Tricia Neuman and Juliette Cubanski of the Kaiser Family Foundation round up the evidence:

It is clear that the Medicare savings provisions in the ACA, such as reductions in provider payment updates and Medicare Advantage payments, have played a major role….In addition, the Budget Control Act of 2011 also exerted downward pressure on Medicare spending through sequestration that reduced payments to providers and plans by 2 percent beginning in 2013. And yet even after incorporating these scheduled payment reductions in the baseline, CBO has continued to lower its projections of Medicare spending.

So what else might be going on here? In addition to scheduled reductions in Medicare’s more formulaic payment rates, providers may be tightening their belts and looking to deliver care more efficiently in response to financial incentives included in the ACA, and it is possible that these changes are having a bigger effect than expected. For example, CMS recently reported that hospital readmission rates dropped by 130,000 between January 2012 and August 2013. It is also possible that hospitals and other providers are using data and other analytic tools more successfully to track utilization and spending and to reduce excess costs. Another more straightforward factor is that several expensive and popular brand-name drugs have gone off patent in recent years, which has helped to keep Medicare drug spending in check.

No one knows for sure if these reductions are permanent, or whether high growth rates will reappear in the future. But even if the low growth rates of the past few years can’t be sustained, I suspect that Medicare growth will continue to be lower than anyone expected. There are two reasons for this. First, the growth rate of medical costs in general has been declining steadily for the past 30 years, and this has now been going on long enough that it’s highly unlikely to be a statistical blip. After a surge in the 80s and 90s, we really are returning to the growth rates that were common earlier in the century, and obviously this will affect Medicare.

Second, Obamacare really will have an impact. Not everything in it will work, but it includes a lot of different cost-cutting measures and some of them will turn out to be pretty effective. And who knows? If Republicans ever stop pouting over Obamacare, we might even be able to experiment with different kinds of cost reductions.

There’s a fair amount of year-to-year variability in health care inflation, and we should expect to have some years of high growth. But I’ll bet the average over the next decade is somewhere around 2 percent above the general inflation rate. That’s not too bad.

Original article:

Medicare Just Keeps Producing Great Budget News

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Medicare Just Keeps Producing Great Budget News