Nov 13th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
Endgame
Riding on my bicycle I saw a motocrash:
— Handicapping the House races.
— Janet Napolitano talks immigration at CAP.
— Arne Duncan talks education.
— Greg Mankiw and Ryan Avent both have interesting remarks on this chart but is the chart accurate? I’d like to see it replicated by someone who’s from someplace more credible than the Mises Institute.
— Benning Road streetcar stops now complete.
— Maybe I’m just a philistine, but I think this new public art in my neighborhood is ridiculous.
— Water on the Moon, but is it full of alien Moon fish?
The Sugarcubes’ “Motorcrash” carries a vital message about the perils of auto-oriented transportation policies.
50 Responses to “Endgame”
Register
RSSLogin
Advertisement
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Books By Matthew Yglesias
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Abortion
Afghanistan
Basketball
Blanche Lincoln
Budget
China
climate
Congress
Crime
DC
Demographics
Economics
Economy
Energy
Environment
EU
Finance
Football
Gender
Health Care
History
Inequality
International Law
International Relations
Iran
Israel
Media
Monetary Policy
National Security
NATO
NBA
Palestine
Political Reform
Public Health
Public Opinion
Race
Regulation
Russia
Sarah Palin
Sports
Stimulus
taxes
Technology
Trade
transportation
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Contact Matthew Yglesias
Use this form to contact blog author Matthew Yglesias.
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
November 13th, 2009 at 6:27 pm
I don’t understand these busy little sculptures either. Looks like someone doodling with metals. The fact that it’s a pastel yellow doesn’t help.
November 13th, 2009 at 6:35 pm
Water on the Moon, but is it full of alien Moon fish?
Perhaps; more likely they’re natives
November 13th, 2009 at 6:49 pm
Holy crap that yellow “sculpture” is horrible, unless it’s trying to express something like the “desperate cry for help” emotion that overcomes folks living in the little boxes in downtown DC (just kidding!).
November 13th, 2009 at 6:51 pm
Wow, that damn thing is AAHHT? I was dropping off a soccer player who lives in your building the other night when the kids spotted it. We all decided it was some construction equipment designed to bore out a huge tunnel, a la chunnel.
We were looking forward to driving to England next time we came through your neighborhood.
November 13th, 2009 at 7:05 pm
How would Little Matty know anything about the credibility of the Mises Institute? He has no familiarity whatsoever with Austrian School theory and is an unreconstructed Keynesian/Krugmaniac economic illiterate.
November 13th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
Maybe you’re a philistine? C’mon, Matt. Own it. You’re a charter member of the Dave Noon Philistinism Society.
November 13th, 2009 at 7:29 pm
that sculpture still looks a bazillion times better than the buildings in that area, so on balance i’d say its an improvement to the area.
November 13th, 2009 at 7:37 pm
As a reminder that the savings of the unemployed are being depleted –and people are sliding deeper into the shithole crafted by the Republicans — I bring you “Bohemian Bankruptcy”
from across the Pond. By “Drag Queen” , heh heh
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5EFEQ9aY6o&feature=player_embedded#
November 13th, 2009 at 7:46 pm
PS “Freddie” is Sir Fred Goodwin, former CEO of Royal Bank of Scotland. See
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/25/fred-goodwin-exchief-of-r_n_178925.html
November 13th, 2009 at 7:50 pm
I suspect Mr. Thies is full of it, even if his chart is correct. Clues:
- “generosity of the package of cash and noncash benefits”
- “left-liberal do-gooders”
- “there is nobody to blame but the electorate”
Generous? Are you kidding me? Do-gooders? Really?
We’ve already seen evidence that the desires of the lower income electorate are by-and-large ignored by Federal elected officials. In any case, voters aren’t in a position to fine-tune policy. Finally, as Mr. Avent points out, people in those brackets may well be able to see the bigger picture of income progression. My gut feel is that there’s a different subject outlook on increased earned income, as opposed to “the dole”.
November 13th, 2009 at 7:55 pm
Because it’s called the Mises Institute?
November 13th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
joe from Lowell:
The substance and detail of your comment, which, as always, demonstrates a thorough familiarity with the topic at hand, is overwhelming.
November 13th, 2009 at 8:20 pm
Modern yes contemporary no. To me the strange thing about “Liftoff” is that is seems roughly identical (well maybe except for the pastel yellowness) to the sort of sculpture that wasn’t new and strange anymore over thirty years ago.
If people still haven’t gotten it after thirty years, maybe it wasn’t ahead of its time (the same goes for new freshwater macro). How can it stay modern for so long ?
November 13th, 2009 at 8:27 pm
Uh…thanks?
You can go back to handing your mimeographed, handwritten pamphlets now.
November 13th, 2009 at 8:36 pm
Maybe I’m just a philistine, but I think this new public art in my neighborhood is ridiculous.
Reminds me of the “art” in front of my old office building, the IBM building in NYC.
November 13th, 2009 at 8:39 pm
joe from Lowell:
With your unquenchable intellectual curiosity, I’m sure you could get through these four little pamphlets here and here and here and here in 45 minutes.
November 13th, 2009 at 8:42 pm
How would Little Matty know anything about the credibility of the Mises Institute?
Leave it to a “Libertarian” “Goldbug” to disparage Little People.
The substance and detail of your comment, which, as always, demonstrates a thorough familiarity with the topic at hand, is overwhelming.
You do this all the time, and it truly baffles me. Joe and other spend hours and hours refuting all of your paranoid, stupid ideas, but you act like once that thread ends, a reset button is pushed and if we don’t refute all the minutia of your deranged worldview (and white-supremacist sympathies), then we’re just afraid to debate or engage with you.
It’s stupid and transparent.
November 13th, 2009 at 8:54 pm
Anthony, you really aren’t worth the powder. There’s never any substantive response to me or to the Austrian School by you, other commenters, Yglesias or the media in general. Ever. It’s absolutely astonishing. I rarely, if ever, get into Austrian School minutiae. It’s not necessary. You guys don’t know even know the basics. But you sure know you hate it.
Racist racist racist is about the best you can manage, which is preposterous in any event.
November 13th, 2009 at 8:56 pm
Bob,
I spent about 7 years as a frequent daily reader and commenter at Reason. I probably understand the political aspects, if not the entirety, of Austrian economics better than you. At a minimum, I could give you ten pages that get an A in an undergraduate course.
I spent years living like Jane Goodall among your sort. I don’t find your sad, silly little cult foolish because I don’t understand it, but because I do.
November 13th, 2009 at 8:57 pm
Looks to me as if the Mies Institute people have put together a “hypothetical” family that receives food stamps and Medicaid benefits. I’m just gyessing, though.
November 13th, 2009 at 8:59 pm
Racist racist racist is about the best you can manage, which is preposterous in any event.
Don’t you mean: “critique of culture, critique of culture, critique of culture”?
Yeah, you’re not racist at all.
November 13th, 2009 at 8:59 pm
…whereas the only possible reason people dismiss your jackassery by shouting “Gooooooold!” like a bandy-legged prospector in a 50s western is because we’re intimidated by your intellect, and by the impregnable logic of the Austrian economics cult.
November 13th, 2009 at 9:02 pm
I once called Bob out on the fact that the financial bubble was a perfect example of the fractional reserve banking those loonies are always on about – you know, the fractional reserve banking I’ve never heard of because I’m so ignorant about Austrian economics – but the people who proclaim their supposed loyalty to the school only want to echo Republican lines about Community Reinvestment Act and the deficit.
He didn’t have shit to say.
November 13th, 2009 at 9:03 pm
Bob, honestly, don’t you remember when you floated your stupid conviction that inflation = theft? You got tons of serious responses that thoroughly refuted you. At the time, I predicted that amnesia would set in the next time you showed up to comment, and you’d say that if we didn’t go through the whole thing again, we’re not engaging you. Unlike the “Austrian school” or “Dr.” Paul, my prediction actually came true!
Also, here’s something by an economist who was formerly duped by your stupid school and is still conservative:
http://economics.gmu.edu/bcaplan/whyaust.htm
November 13th, 2009 at 9:19 pm
Motocrashes are so much more interesting when you’re on a bike and crash with a car. I wouldn’t recommend it, but if it happens, take notice. I’ve done it four times, and it’s a rush. Learning to roll still is the best thing I’ve leaned. Strangely enough, I’ve had eleven concussions, and none of them came from hitting a car. Only one came from a bicycle accident, but it was way off road. People always tell me to wear a helmet, but everyday life is more dangerous. Do you wear a helmet in a hot tub? That was my most severe head injury. Skull fracture, concussion, and bleeding from the ears. I had another big one walking into a hotel lobby. Do you wear a helmet when you go to a hotel? Do you wear one going to the mailbox?
November 13th, 2009 at 9:42 pm
More from Mr. Thies:
Since Milton Friedman developed the negative income tax, waaay back in the 1950s, there can be no excuse for any educated person to not be aware of the fact that taxes and means-tested benefits destroy the lower classes’ positive incentive to work.
Oh yeah, that’s credible.
November 13th, 2009 at 9:54 pm
I just checked out the Mises chart, and I don’t think it’s accurate. First off, there are too many unfounded assumptions about those at the lower end of the spectrum. For instance, he assumes that the family gets Medicaid, TANF, has Section 8 housing, and food stamps. All at once? Really? And then there’s the assumption that getting medicaid may actually help the poor to be able to find jobs that focus on cash compensation rather than health benefits…which kind of flies in the face of his conclusions (that this type of aid discourages working) and flies in the face of some libertarian arguments against government health care (since it seems to grant workers more freedom to be able to find different jobs and not be hampered to their job’s health care program).
I also hate this argument, because it reduces the incentive to work to a purely economic choice. First off, most people on government assistance don’t enjoy it–they aren’t laying around living the high life. Second, this assumes that people don’t have a natural drive to work and to improve their life circumstances (which, ironically, flies in the face of why libertarians–and others–believe that capitalism works). Finally, this assumes that there is no stigma associated with Section 8 housing, food stamps, and TANF. Yeah, right. I don’t know anyone who proudly flaunts the fact that they don’t have to work because they have everything they could possibly need because of their $500 in food stamps for the month.
November 13th, 2009 at 10:01 pm
There is some art so ugly that you know a grant proposal was involved.
November 13th, 2009 at 10:01 pm
In regards to the article about the DC streetcar tracks.I am curious to know if there was any opisition to the plan.In my own city they are trying to build a new lightrail line and their is a lot of NIMBY style opisition. If there was oppisition in Dc ,i would be interested in knowing how it was overcome.I am also curious about what the fare will be. I would like to thank in advance anyone that can provide any answers.
November 13th, 2009 at 10:10 pm
#23 – I’m not clear as to your point. Ask me a question. I’ll answer it. It’s not my intention to duck anything. Also, I never knew Reason to be big on Mises or Austrian theory. The Koch family are big suck-ups to the beltway crowd.
Anthony, the only response to my claim that inflation = theft that I recall was that as long as the voters voted for it, it wasn’t theft. Mechanically, there has to be a shift in assets or what’s its purpose?
I don’t recall anyone seriously disputing that the shift in purchasing power occurred, only that if it had voter support, it therefore wouldn’t be immoral or theft. I think I also conceded that one’s sense of morality would determine if one thought the asset shift was theft.
(I suppose if the Germans had voted to gas Jews, Gypsies and Gays, it wouldn’t have been murder.)
I’ve also repeatedly stated that the only knowledgeable Austrian critics all seem to be at GMU. I’m not inclined to write a thesis on what’s wrong with the entirety of GMU critics. Set out one of their points for debate.
By the way, why not show that YGLESIAS knows something about Austrian Theory?
November 13th, 2009 at 10:16 pm
Anthony, the only response to my claim that inflation = theft that I recall was that as long as the voters voted for it, it wasn’t theft. Mechanically, there has to be a shift in assets or what’s its purpose?
I don’t recall anyone seriously disputing that the shift in purchasing power occurred, only that if it had voter support, it therefore wouldn’t be immoral or theft. I think I also conceded that one’s sense of morality would determine if one thought the asset shift was theft.
(I suppose if the Germans had voted to gas Jews, Gypsies and Gays, it wouldn’t have been murder.)
Your insistance on making equivalences between the plight of GOOOOOLLLLDDDD to murdered Jews and others is really disgusting.
Go back and read the thread. People said much more than “people voted for it.” They went through all your “person A, person B” nonsense and refuted it.
By the way, why not show that YGLESIAS knows something about Austrian Theory?
I’m much more concerned with pernicious racists with crazy ideas like you.
November 13th, 2009 at 10:42 pm
I’ve also repeatedly stated that the only knowledgeable Austrian critics all seem to be at GMU. I’m not inclined to write a thesis on what’s wrong with the entirety of GMU critics. Set out one of their points for debate.
Ahh, but every time you show up here, we have to go back and re-refute all of your nonsense, or else we’re too scared to debate you. You really are an ass.
November 13th, 2009 at 11:27 pm
Sort of tempted to riff off Fostert’s comment, but on the other hand fuck it.
November 13th, 2009 at 11:34 pm
This phrase is incorrect.
Start here, Bob Roddis.
Students of so-called “Austrian economics” calling people who have studied actual economics “illiterate[s]” is either classic projection or a sick joke.
Provide one substantive “Austrian economics” argument that has a quantitative basis, falsifiable premises, and historical validity and maybe the economics community will agree to engage. Until then, STFU and go fling poo at the creationists and Scientologists.
November 13th, 2009 at 11:42 pm
I’m much more concerned with pernicious racists with crazy ideas like you.
I’m sorry, that was unfair. I should have said “pernicious culture critiquers with crazy ideas like you.”
November 14th, 2009 at 1:07 am
Question: how do you know who wrote a given Free Exchange post? Ryan Avent’s blog says he contributes to Free Exchange, but which posts? Did I miss the memo or is it inside intel?
November 14th, 2009 at 1:20 am
I worked up a model attempting to replicate the Mise chart. Pretty neat. I would share but you can’t attach spreadsheets.
My conclusions are as follows:
Low-income individuals in America (specifically Georgia in this analysis) receive substantial non-cash benefits (insurance, improved housing, assistance with child care, etc). Mostly taxes go up as income rises, except when your children lose PeachCare insurance or when mother loses Medicaid healthcare assistance because of income limits. Income taxes (state and federal), EITC, FICA, Medicare taxes, Section 8, and food stamps are all reduced as you earn more income. The high marginal tax rates in excess of 100% are a function of the hard cutoffs for eligibility to insurance. When you reached those limits, there is a significant incentive to work less.
If you aren’t on Medicaid (my understanding is males aren’t eligible in Georgia, unless you consider the disabled and elderly, but those individuals’ benefits didn’t seem applicable in a discussion of work incentives caused by marginal tax rates) or don’t have children, then you would experience high marginal tax rates for gross income earned from $0 to $10,000. Up to $10,000, you would have less benefits by earning more money. After that, income less taxes plus subsidies increase as gross income increases.
November 14th, 2009 at 1:24 am
Bobbis has an M-Meter ready to help you expel the body Keynesans.
Though like his fellow Austrotologists, he does expect to be paid in GOOOOOOOLLLLLLD.
November 14th, 2009 at 1:44 am
There’s never any substantive response to me or to the Austrian School by you, other commenters, Yglesias or the media in general. Ever. It’s absolutely astonishing.
Given that one of the tenets of Austrotology is a disdain for empiricism, that’s funny.
Ironically, unlike other cults, the Austrotologists and affiliated libertarian orgs distribute their secret scriptures for free, though admittedly the tax bennies may compensate.
November 14th, 2009 at 3:21 am
Greg Mankiw is right. Of course there is a Poverty Trap. People LOVE poverty. Poor people’s most fervent wish to remain forever impoverished.
Why would this HUMAN TRASH, who can survive just barely and in complete humiliation and degradation by not working, take one of those secure, high paying jobs that are sweeping the nation like a wildfire burning out of control?
The ever available American Dream! The Wal-Mart Theory of Economic Prosperity! Fucking moron.
November 14th, 2009 at 4:59 am
The marginal tax rates listed are probably close to true, simply because of the hard cutoffs listed by #37
Plus if you actually read Hayek, Bob Roddis, you will find he makes hilarious claims about the superiority of his unemployment theory despite it being unprovable.
Hayek literally says that his theory about unemployment is unprovable. I’ll take him at his word, and discard his theory as unscientific.
The austrian school is debated all the time, but the Austrians don’t notice because they are too busy thinking they are correct. It is a common right-wing thought process to delete from memory any objections to their theory, and Austrians tend not to notice any substantive objections becuase they are right-wingers. The thought process goes something like this: Because the theory is true, it is impossible to have objections, therefore these words people say to me are meaningless or don’t exist.
They can then claim there has been no engagement of their ideas.
November 14th, 2009 at 5:53 am
If we have suffer through another Great Depression, why not do it this way, the tolerable way.
Marshall Auerback
The government hired about 60 per cent of the unemployed in public works and conservation projects that planted a billion trees, saved the whooping crane, modernized rural America, and built such diverse projects as the Cathedral of Learning in Pittsburgh, the Montana state capitol, much of the Chicago lakefront, New York’s Lincoln Tunnel and Triborough Bridge complex, the Tennessee Valley Authority and the aircraft carriers Enterprise and Yorktown. It also built or renovated 2,500 hospitals, 45,000 schools, 13,000 parks and playgrounds, 7,800 bridges, 700,000 miles of roads, and a thousand airfields. And it employed 50,000 teachers, rebuilt the country’s entire rural school system, and hired 3,000 writers, musicians, sculptors and painters, including Willem de Kooning and Jackson Pollock.
November 14th, 2009 at 5:54 am
If mises.org’s chart is accurate, all it tells me is that the minimum wage is way too low. If you want to create better work incentives, just increase the minimum wage, that’s all.
November 14th, 2009 at 9:04 am
I once called Bob out on the fact that the financial bubble was a perfect example of the fractional reserve banking those loonies are always on about – you know, the fractional reserve banking I’ve never heard of because I’m so ignorant about Austrian economics – but the people who proclaim their supposed loyalty to the school only want to echo Republican lines about Community Reinvestment Act and the deficit.
Not that people who believe in Austrian-school economics haven’t suggested that the CRA et al. are problematic, but I don’t recall anyone who is a dyed-in-the-wool Austrian-schooler fingering the CRA and other race-conscious policies as being the primary cause of the bubble over the low interest rates of the 00s.
Thomas Woods in Meltdown specifically stated that with the ultra-low interest rates of the mid 00s, there would have been a bubble regardless. Tom DiLorenzo specifically stated that the loose monetary policy of the Federal Reserve was what funded the bad subprime loans.
There is a great deal of debate in Austrian circles over the extent to which racial issues in mortgage lending contributed to the crisis, although a general theme is that credit expansion per se was the underlying problem regardless of the reasons.
I think you are confusing those who are opportunistically pretending to ally themselves with the Austrian school with actual Austrian schoolers. A good test of whether or not someone is really loyal to the Austrian school is whether or not they loved George W. Bush and whether or not they supported the War in Iraq (most real Austrian schoolers hate Bush and the war).
That the CRA and related issues are the primary cause of the meltdown is more of a Human Biodiversity/Evolcon position (e.g. Steve Sailer), even though some of them admit that fractional reserve credit expansion was part of the problem.
November 14th, 2009 at 10:10 am
(I suppose if the Germans had voted to gas Jews, Gypsies and Gays, it wouldn’t have been murder.)
If this is what passes for an argument, then how is credibility even remotely possible?
November 14th, 2009 at 10:15 am
If this is what passes for an argument, then how is credibility even remotely possible?
Bob isn’t arguing that–he’s trying to satirize our argument about inflation by saying it is equivalent to saying that if people voted to murder Jews, it would be all right.
It is still a really disgusting place to go, and irrelevant, and not analogous—but it’s not Bob’s argument. It’s how his sick mind sees our arguments. He can’t make any distinctions that are obvious to us. Also, GOOOOOLLLLDDDDD
November 14th, 2009 at 10:23 am
Arun:
This is an important question. What types of activities that are generally considered to be crimes are suddenly transformed into non-crimes due to the fact that the acts are committed by governments enforcing the results of an electoral majority? I’d suggest that the answer should be “few”.
Presently, activities like US drone missiles shot at Pakistani villagers come to mind. I submit that such an activity is murder. The fact that an elected government did it doesn’t make it “ok”.
November 14th, 2009 at 10:26 am
Arun–nevermind. Bob is sicker than I thought. Carry on.
November 14th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
unfortunately the vast majority of public art is banal, awful. I would prefer a fat old fart on a pedestal, but the quality of representational sculpture at the moment is similarly horrific. spare my another Seward Johnson or SJ knockoff. it’s a shame.
November 15th, 2009 at 1:27 pm
Glaivester,
Just one thing:
The CRA is not a race-conscious policy. It deals entirely with the geographic areas in which deposit institutions’ customers are located.