When Everyone Gets an "F," the Prof Fails

Or maybe not.

Reading his reasons, perhaps Prof. Horwitz has a point.

Is this Naomi Klein's Kickstarter?

Wow. Tyler von Strauss points us to a super-creepy kickstarter project:

(clic the pic for an even more inappropriate image).

I thought maybe it was just me and my weird ways, so I showed it to Mrs. Angus, who was horrified.

So, so, so wrong.

Did education reform cause France to lose WWII?

People, Thomas Sowell says yes! I am not making this up. For realz.

Check it out:

In France between the two World Wars, the teachers' union decided that schools should replace patriotism with internationalism and pacifism. Books that told the story of the heroic defense of French soldiers against the German invaders at Verdun in 1916, despite suffering massive casualties, were replaced by books that spoke impartially about the suffering of all soldiers -- both French and German -- at Verdun. 

Germany invaded France again in 1940, and this time the world was shocked when the French surrendered after just 6 weeks of fighting -- especially since military experts expected France to win. But two decades of undermining French patriotism and morale had done their work.

Tom, I'ma NOT gonna let you finish. You have a PhD in economics from the University of Chicago. You should be deeply ashamed of yourself.

Lack of Ceteris Paribus? Check.

Failure to define/consider a reasonable alternative hypothesis? Check

A complete breakdown of logic and intellectual integrity? Check mate.


Finally to those of you who may object to my title by claiming that France did not lose WWII, I say: HA!

The culture that is Austria

(clic the pic for an even more futile image).

I wonder what they'll think of next? An air-tight pet carrier?

As in medicine, so in development?

Jonah Lehrer has a great article in Wired documenting the difficulty of truly understanding causal forces.

Here is a representative section:

The story of torcetrapib is a tale of mistaken causation. Pfizer was operating on the assumption that raising levels of HDL cholesterol and lowering LDL would lead to a predictable outcome: Improved cardiovascular health. Less arterial plaque. Cleaner pipes. But that didn’t happen.

Such failures occur all the time in the drug industry.


To recap. HDL is the "good" cholesterol and LDL the "bad". Pfizer found a drug that did what the quote describes, but it turned out to kill subjects in the phase III trial and ended up costing the company billions in market capitalization.

In my opinion, much of macro development advice has worked the same way.

Experts observe that successful countries exhibit qualities A, B & C. Developing countries are advised, subsidized, threatened to emulate the successful countries on these attributes. But the patients do not improve!

Education, Institutions, "getting the prices right", openness to trade, the list goes on of macro advice given and to a surprising extent taken by the developing world, without the implicitly promised results.*

The only real difference in the medical and developmental analogy is that Pfizer lost billions of dollars due to their misreading of cause and effect, while the World Bank just chugs on and on with an ever growing size and budget, producing a new World Development Report every year and acting as if the past had never happened.

That is to say, there is little to no accountability for bad advice or improper diagnoses among the IFIs compared to pharmaceutical companies.



* In our 2007 JDE paper, Robin and I show that school enrollment rates, government spending, openness to trade, political constraints on the chief executive,bureaucratic quality, corruption, and overall law and order are all converging over time.

Double Fail

We all know that the Middle East is full of fail, but sometimes the fail is too good to pass up.

Consider first the "Palestinian Spring" story.

So here's an entrenched calling for his own ouster? After all the Arab spring involved deposing existing leaders.

Next up is that well known reformer King Abdullah giving women the right to vote.

Not in the upcoming election of course, but later. This will make a big difference in Saudi policies I'm sure as votes mean so much in the Kingdom.

PS: If you are wondering where I get off calling a geriatric despot a "reformer", it's right in the AP story linked to above:

"The right to vote is by far the biggest change introduced by Abdullah, considered a reformer, since he became the country's de facto ruler in 1995 during the illness of King Fahd."

Barack Obama comes out of the closet

Wow. President O is planning to ask for $1.5 Trillion in new tax revenues with no changes to Social Security and perhaps no changes to Medicare either.

Finally the bullsh*t is over and the cards are on the table.

You know, if this doesn't kick-start the economy, I don't know what will!!

It's not the bombs, but where they're hidden

Apparently Hamid Karzai doesn't have any problems with suicide bombers, he just wants them to not hide the bombs in their turbans:

"Afghan President Hamid Karzai met recently with members of the country’s clerical councils to get their assistance in persuading insurgents not to hide explosives in suicide bombers' turbans or in other religious or cultural symbols.

In the last five weeks, suicide bombers have killed the mayor of Kandahar and a senior cleric in the city with small amounts of explosives hidden in their turbans. In both cases, the bombers grabbed their victims before triggering the explosives.

It is believed to be the first time turbans have been used in suicide attacks.

A man’s turban has important religious and cultural significance and it is considered dishonourable to touch it.

Karzai met with clerics this week and pleaded with them to use their influence on the Taliban and other insurgents to dissuade them from using cultural or religious garments to hide explosives."

I certainly hope the president succeeds in this noble quest to get the bombers to go back to strapping explosives to their chests or putting them on women or in camel humps or whatever, and to convince them that they must always, always honor the turban!

Rhetoric vs. Reality

Or, the progressives who cried wolf.

Here's Krugman:

For the deal itself, given the available information, is a disaster, and not just for President Obama and his party. It will damage an already depressed economy; it will probably make America’s long-run deficit problem worse, not better; and most important, by demonstrating that raw extortion works and carries no political cost, it will take America a long way down the road to banana-republic status.

Now DeLong:

Let me reserve judgment until the surrender-and-visit-to-the-cleaners is actually set out, but I suspect that come Tuesday I will be forecasting a double-dip. Horrible for the economy. Horrible for America. Horrible for the world. And horrible for Obama's aspirations for a second term as well.

And then we see exactly what they are getting all worked up about (hat tip to Tyler for posting a re-scaled graph):

That is a graph of discretionary Federal spending after the "cuts". Yes, it's going up (though note that the data are not inflation adjusted). Doesn't seem much like a disaster, does it?

Here's more from the OG (original graphmaker):

The “cuts” in the deal are only cuts from the CBO “baseline,” which is a Washington construct of ever-rising spending. And even these “cuts” from the baseline include $156 billion of interest savings, which are imaginary because the underlying cuts are imaginary.

No program or agency terminations are identified in the deal. None of the vast armada of federal subsidies are targeted for elimination. Old folks will continue to gorge themselves on inflated benefits paid for by young families and future generations. None of Senator Tom Coburn’s or Senator Rand Paul’s specific cuts were included.

The federal government will still run a deficit of $1 trillion next year. This deal will “cut” the 2012 budget of $3.6 trillion by just $22 billion, or less than 1 percent.

Bam! The Tea Party just hit America with a steel garbage can! Sproing! America is bleeding profusly. Zoink! the EMTs are coming to take America out on a stretcher. Oh the humanity.

Somewhere, Killer Grease Mungowitz is smiling.

Bhide - Phelps on IMF

KPC pal Amar Bhide has a nice piece in Newsweek (with Edmund Phelps) about the IMF. Clear and useful.

Excerpt:

The Greek debacle and the North African drama raise existential questions about the IMF. Responsible governments have no business borrowing vast sums from abroad, rather than from domestic sources. That’s what tinpot regimes do. And lending even more to borrowers who can’t pay what they already owe? That’s what loan sharks and mafiosi do.

The IMF’s business model sabotages properly functioning capitalism, victimizing ordinary people while benefiting the elites. Do we need international agencies to enable irresponsible—verging on immoral—borrowing and lending? Instead of dreaming up too-clever-by-half schemes to stumble through crises after they happen, why not just stop imprudent banks from accommodating foreign borrowing by feckless governments?

The culture that is New Jersey: booty call edition

Look, I am not saying this is wrong or right, but I am pretty sure that it's illegal:

"Sexy costumes lead to firing of NJ casino servers"

Pretty funny that they want to go back to the "Boardwalk Empire" days. That will take more than flapper costumes and age discrimination.

Prohibition?

Segregation?

Ah, New Jersey. Is there anything you won't do?

In order to save the budget we first have to destroy it

Christina Romer tells Ezra Klein that cutting spending now won't show people that it's going to be under control, but spending more now with promises to fix it later will!

People, I am not making this up:

If people do think we’re out of control of our budget, that surely can’t be good for investment. But how do we show we’re in control? House Republicans say it’s by cutting $61 billion out of this year’s budget. A more sensible view is that $61 billion won’t do anything, so why would anyone be reassured by that? The more sensible thing is we should have a package for short-term stimulus that also includes concrete policies that deal with the deficit, which means entitlements and taxes and defense spending and everything else.

Yeah, only a moron would think that cutting spending now would make people feel better about the budget. Just let us spend a little bit more now and we promise will fix EVERYTHING real soon!

Is there anyone who still buys this?

neo-neo-colonialism?

In a stunningly ignorant article in today's WSJ, Bret Stephens calls for the re-colonization of selected countries:

"some new version of colonialism may be the best thing that could happen to at least some countries in the post-colonial world"

He's not totally specific; he names Haiti, Ivory Coast & Sudan, but also says "Post-colonial Africa has seen the future. As often as not it looks like Zimbabwe".

Wow.

Then there's this:

"The colonialists of yore may often have been bigots, but they were also, just as often, doers. Their colonies were better places than the shipwrecked countries that we have today".

Holy Crap.

First, sub-Saharan Africa is actually improving on governance on the whole, not digressing. Second, colonialism helped create the conditions that plague the region like artificial borders, ginned up ethnic rivalries, diminished local capacities and so on. Third, "sure they were bigots, but they got things done"? Really? We are going to use "the trains ran on time" as a serious argument?

Finally, as to the colonies being "better places" than their current independent counterparts, I have to ask, better for who? Has Bret ever read about the colonial experience of the Congo? Has he ever heard of apartheid?

This guy should be fired, ASAP.

Congratulations, Venezuela!

According to the Economist, exactly 5 countries are forecasted to have a shrinking economy in 2011. Only two of them are PIIGS (Portugal & Greece). Two others are small islands (Barbados & Puerto Rico).

The other is Venezuela, who is forecasted to do worse than Spain, Iceland, Ireland, and Italy (among many many others).

Nice work Hugo!

Here he is people: the stupidest man alive

yes Mick Cornett, you KNOW I'm talking 'bout you!

Epic Boyfriend Fail

The guy got the tickets. He knew it was tough spot. The young lady said, "I'm going to get hit." Candy-ass boy said, "No, honey, I'll catch it!"

Then the ball comes, and he not only ducks, he GETS UP AND RUNS. The ball hits her, hard.

And pussweiler boy is happy that "they" got a baseball. He's grinning. He tells the interviewer he "lost it in the lights." Oh, so THAT'S why he ran squealing, because he didn't see the ball. (Though he does now have a facebook page, with some very racy pictures of his girlfriend Sarah...)

If I did that to the LMM, my ass would be so fried for so long I might as well just kill myself.

I would HOPE I might have done it this way. This guy is a fine demonstration of how you act with a date at a baseball game.

1. Stand up, staying still, placing your body between ball and lady.
2. Lady hides behind you.
3. You catch ball.
4. You hand ball to lady; "Here, my love, I got this for you."

Now, there is another way to do it. Lady brings glove, lady defends self, that's all good. But there should be some agreement in advance. As in fact there was, with Bo the Bailer. He agreed he would be in charge of catching the ball.

(Nod to Angry Alex)

Basil Marcaeux v. Mungowitz: A Slapdown

Basil Marceaux: The Video


The Web Site

Oh, no, Basil has achieved self-awareness, of a sort.

Stephen Colbert takes it up.

Of course, if you saw this, you already know.

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Republican Gubernatorial Primary Battle Watch '010 - Tennessee
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes 2010 Election Fox News

Now, one could point out that this is all just sour grapes, since Basil Marceaux is likely to get a higher percentage of the vote than I did, in 2008.

Okay, well, bring it on. I got 2.8% in 2008. If Basil Marceaux beats that today, in the primary...let me ask you, the KPC reader. What should I have to do, what public embarrassment should I suffer, if after making fun of my man Basil he actually does BETTER than I did?

The polls in Tennessee close in 5 hours. Democracy hangs in the balance. Can Mungowitz 2008 beat Marceaux 2010? The voters of Tennessee will decide.

UPDATE: Tennsns must be less sarcastic than I had feared. Basil M got less than 1,000 votes, or about 0.3%. WHEW! I do still think that I will introduce myself as "MichaelMunger.com", so that my website can be michaelmunger.com.com.

UPDATE II: Oh, no! Basil M came on strong late, in those western precincts. He ended up with 3,500 votes, or 0.5%. Still, that is as nothing compared with my manly 2.8%. WOOT!

Onions

People, VV Chari has 'em!

Check out his recent testimony at the sausage factory.

Here's the punch line:

"I would argue that the United States devotes shamefully little to economic research. For example, the NSF's budget for economics is a pitiful $27 million out of which $2.6 million goes to the worthwhile activity of supporting the Panel Study on Income Dynamics.

Twenty five million dollars for an activity that is deemed fundamentally important by the people of the United States?

Out of that 25 million dollars, my best estimate is that only about 10 per cent goes to macroeconomics. Compare $2.5 million to an overall NSF budget of $6 billion or to the federal government support of basic research of roughly $30 billion.

I should emphasize that, in my judgment, the NSF's peer review process in economics is exceptionally fair and thoughtful. Expanding resources to the NSF's economics program will surely result in much better economic research and will result in very little waste."

Wow, only 27 million "pitiful" dollars for an activity that the "people of the United States" consider to be "fundamentally important", i.e. DSGE modeling!

The horror!

People, he's basically using the crisis to argue in favor of more summer money!

If you look up onions in the dictionary, all that should be there is this:

Scrubbing the planet with a diamond crusted toothbrush

As we settle into the aftermath of the death of the "climate bill", it is worthwhile I think to consider the effectiveness of another government program designed to reduce carbon emissions, the ethanol program.

The CBO just released a report showing that the cost of a metric ton of carbon abatement via this program is $750!

By way of comparison, the WSJ points out that the price of carbon envisioned in cap and trade would be something around $25 - $30.

But that's not all. The NRDC points out that the CBO's estimates of abatement costs do not include "the emissions associated with land use change—i.e. the carbon dioxide that is released from forests or grasslands that are cleared and converted to farmland as a result of ethanol production—though the report notes that if those emissions were taken into account, the cost could increase substantially. Indeed analysis done by EPA shows that when you factor in the impacts of indirect land use chance, corn ethanol actually increases emissions relative to gasoline."

YIKES!

So our main biofuel program is fairly expensive and in all probability actually raises carbon emissions?

Is this a great country, or what?

Adventures in arithmetic

Or Eating soup with a fork.

The administration is now claiming that the $862 billion stimulus package has created or saved between 2.5 and 3.6 million jobs.

Lets suppose this is true and do some arithmetic.

Lets assume that 3/4 of the 862 billion has been spent, and the number of jobs is in the middle of the range, say 3 million (that should prove I'm an economist, eh?).

Remember these jobs are not permanent, they are "job years".

So, 862 billion x .75 / 3 million = $215,500 per job year!

Wow.

Nice work guys. See you in November.