Thursday, October 04, 2007
My Work, In the News
Commentary on our department's reccomendation that the average UI tax be reduced from 1.38% to 1.33% for 2008:
Thankfully, at least one government body isn't embracing the taxing philosophy outlined above.
On Tuesday, the state Employment Security Council voted to reduce Nevada's unemployment tax in 2008 as a way to inject more cash into the economy.
Allowing employers to keep more of their earnings will "provide an economic stimulus, albeit a small one," said Cindy Jones, the commission's administrator who is expected to implement the recommendation next month.
What a refreshing concept.
Thankfully, at least one government body isn't embracing the taxing philosophy outlined above.
On Tuesday, the state Employment Security Council voted to reduce Nevada's unemployment tax in 2008 as a way to inject more cash into the economy.
Allowing employers to keep more of their earnings will "provide an economic stimulus, albeit a small one," said Cindy Jones, the commission's administrator who is expected to implement the recommendation next month.
What a refreshing concept.
Scott Adams on Economists' Brains
The creator of Dilbert studied economics in college. He muses on the effects of this on his thinking in a blog:
The primary skill of an economist is identifying all of the explanations for various phenomena. Cognitive dissonance is, at its core, the inability to recognize and accept other explanations. I’m oversimplifying, but you get the point. The more your brain is trained for economics, the less it is susceptible to cognitive dissonance, or so it seems.
The joke about economists is that they are always using the phrase “On the other hand.” Economists are trained to recognize all sides of an argument. That seems like an easy and obvious skill, but in my experience, the general population lacks that skill. Once people take a side, they interpret any argument on the other side as absurd. In other words, they are relatively susceptible to cognitive dissonance.
The primary skill of an economist is identifying all of the explanations for various phenomena. Cognitive dissonance is, at its core, the inability to recognize and accept other explanations. I’m oversimplifying, but you get the point. The more your brain is trained for economics, the less it is susceptible to cognitive dissonance, or so it seems.
The joke about economists is that they are always using the phrase “On the other hand.” Economists are trained to recognize all sides of an argument. That seems like an easy and obvious skill, but in my experience, the general population lacks that skill. Once people take a side, they interpret any argument on the other side as absurd. In other words, they are relatively susceptible to cognitive dissonance.
Wednesday, October 03, 2007
So Dawson doesn't feel Picked On
Colorado Photos
The few photos I took (with my OLD camera) on my short trip to Colorado are up on Flickr. Here's a taste:
Tuesday, October 02, 2007
What We Don't Need
Reno does not need more luxury condos (1800 of them, in three 20-to-30 story towers, in the $380,000-3,000,000 price range).
When I first heard of this project, I thought it would be condos of the someone-can-actually-affor-to-buy-them variety. I was in support of that, because there is a need for affordable housing. $380,000 for a loft? Not "affordable."
Instead, this is another attempt to cash in on once-soaring real estate prices. The base prices for these condos are unreasonable, especially when trying to appeal to "young" workers with an urban feel.
The housing market is facing severe strain - too many people trying to sell too many homes for too high a price. This will only reinforce that trend. I'm hereby against this project. It's within their rights to build it, if they can get everything approved - and I don' t object to that. I just think it's a terrible idea.
When I first heard of this project, I thought it would be condos of the someone-can-actually-affor-to-buy-them variety. I was in support of that, because there is a need for affordable housing. $380,000 for a loft? Not "affordable."
Instead, this is another attempt to cash in on once-soaring real estate prices. The base prices for these condos are unreasonable, especially when trying to appeal to "young" workers with an urban feel.
The housing market is facing severe strain - too many people trying to sell too many homes for too high a price. This will only reinforce that trend. I'm hereby against this project. It's within their rights to build it, if they can get everything approved - and I don' t object to that. I just think it's a terrible idea.
Woman missing in South Reno
Here's the story in the RGJ. And it rather looks like a Megan I knew from the old college group at First E Free, though it's been a while and I can't tell. But she's about the right age.
For the record...
I am in favor of both a proposed (but won't go anywhere) 50-cent increase in the Federal gas tax, and a surtax to fund the Iraq war.
I'm not a fan of higher taxes, but I'm less a fan of defecit spending (Iraq War, and in particular Bush's use of supplemental budget requests to hide the true hit on the Federal Defecit), and I think a gas tax is a reasonable proposal to address the "gasoline over-consumption is harming the environment" furor. A much more reasonable proposal than raising CAFE standards, or other policies designed to make gas cheaper. Simple Economics says people consume relatively more when things are cheap, and relatively less when things are expensive (depending on the elasticity of the good).
The Federal government continuing the myth that present defecit spending does not matter is not good for anyone. That the Republicans would push it is something I'm ashamed of. If something is important enough to do (as every hawk will tell you Iraq is crucial), it's important enough to pay for. Money has to come from somewhere.
I'm not a fan of higher taxes, but I'm less a fan of defecit spending (Iraq War, and in particular Bush's use of supplemental budget requests to hide the true hit on the Federal Defecit), and I think a gas tax is a reasonable proposal to address the "gasoline over-consumption is harming the environment" furor. A much more reasonable proposal than raising CAFE standards, or other policies designed to make gas cheaper. Simple Economics says people consume relatively more when things are cheap, and relatively less when things are expensive (depending on the elasticity of the good).
The Federal government continuing the myth that present defecit spending does not matter is not good for anyone. That the Republicans would push it is something I'm ashamed of. If something is important enough to do (as every hawk will tell you Iraq is crucial), it's important enough to pay for. Money has to come from somewhere.
Monday, October 01, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)