Charlie Rose

NeilMacCallister  09/15/2010 12:47 PM Report

Gee, doodah, ..I hope you are not disparaging people who actively promote the telling of good stories? That's all that "education" is, isn't it? ..our participation in continuing 'The Great Conversation'?

It's true, REMant's "conversation" is typically as deep and dark as Joseph Conrad's, and I have trouble understanding either author, ..but what the heck, conversation is so much needed in today's society that Taco Bell is charitably printing dialogues onto the face of their sauce packets! (Yesterday's was "Ahhh... We meet again.")

People go where their interests lie. So, thank you, and write on, dood!

doodah  09/14/2010 07:29 AM Report

In honor of REMant's intellect, Windows is scrapping the name, 'Hal' for the next generation in OS software. And will be naming it, 'REMant'.

Congratulations, Mr. Mant. I know it's been a long time coming.

NeilMacCallister  09/13/2010 08:29 PM Report

Thank you, rob, ..I'm glad you also enjoy 'The Teaching Company' (..it is our own personal "Princeton"!) Their monthly mailings are a touchstone mind-saver for me.

So you like the Stephen Hawking inspired dvd's, eh?

..Life is good!

Myself, I have almost squirreled away enough savings to afford that (..only $20!) 12-hr tour-guidance through 'The Age of Pericles'.

Those Greeks had developed an ability to view comedy and tragedy at the same time,..

I suspect that makes us all stronger.

Good luck, and good life to you!

robdverity  09/13/2010 06:28 PM Report

My TEACH12 are all space related (cause that's where I am, right?), but maybe I should switch.

However, the query is still begged, if robotics and/or labor-saving devices remove more and more of the "raise and build" (with less and less individual productivity) how do you measure it - as well as distribute it's products?

I wont have to worry about this, but if we don't self immolate before hand, someone may have to ponder it.

NeilMacCallister  09/13/2010 05:53 PM Report

rob, ..in a www.TEACH12.com course discussing 'The Human Factor', Professor Gary A. Sojka used the sentence: "You are what you eat, raise, and build".

That seems like the "measurement of productivity" that you ask for, ..does it not?

And that stills seems very "relevant" to me!

robdverity  09/13/2010 03:10 PM Report

REMant - I'm nowhere near an economist, nor a wordsmith of your quality so it is with trepidation that I make these assertions. You seem to be hung up on productivity (and Whigs but that's for another time). But my one course (Money & Banking, I think) talked about M1 and M2? Don't remember the distinction but believe it had to do with velocity - rate of money changing hands? My point is productivity alone is losing its sway in our technologically advancing society it seems to me. Technology and sports as an example. What does sports per se add to productivity? Indirectly thru purchasing of advertised products, but not directly. The fans are adding to M1 or is it M2? Is that a contributing productivity? And futuristically, imagine a world of robots that make everything (including more advanced robots - that make more things), how do you measure the value of productivity in such a world?

A system of HUMAN VALUES may have to supplant old school economic formulas. How do you decide who gets what? Capitalistic? (I got mine, where's yours?) Socialistic? (Those damn robots made so many of these widgets, you all may as well have one; besides none of us have to work anymore.)

The wired networks, the social networks, the electronic swirl, spinning on advertisement (is that a productivity measure - how gullible we are?) all seem to so far from the day of Henry Ford's mass production measurable productivity.

All I'm wondering here, is productivity still measurable, and is it (as) relevant anymore?

REMant  09/13/2010 11:50 AM Report

There's nothing necessarily austere about austerity. That likely only appears so to those who think like Mr Krugman that rationality is self-destructiveness. He did put his finger on the issue, but the question is not about "tough love" as he put it, but about the primitivism of his own point of view. At bottom the difference lies in the mercantilist notion, which Keynesians espouse, that everything in life is only a matter of desire, and discounts the notion that to be of benefit an activity must be productive, or vice versa, and is the sort of attitude one finds behind progressive education.

Translated into economic terms the reason why Keynesians think demand is more important is because they value everything by price in exchange, or alternatively, you could say, its cost to oneself, rather than by the benefit it supplies. Thus they can justify more credit, because it sustains or even increases prices. But employment matters not at all if it does not produce, except as welfare, and a downturn is clearly evidence that productivity lagged the increase in credit (ie, money). Central bankers and and other equity owners of this persuasion bemoan the loss in the price of assets, but the revaluation is necessary based on the underlying productivity, and the price really cannot be recovered short of inflation, which at the same time reduces the value of the currency, because as productivity increases prices necessarily decline along with the cost. Similarly high asset prices can never be a matter of reduced supply, only of an oversupply of money relative to them, and supply and demand will be in balance no matter what the price level is. A gain in the stock mkt, for instance, cannot reflect a gain in real wealth. All it reflects is that ppl have the money (ie, credit) to drive up the price of stocks, but clearly not the productivity to pay off the debt. It must reflect inflation, because if it reflected an increase in productivity there would be more opportunities to invest and/or more goods to buy. As productivity increases the price of everything must decline, including money, and therefore the supply of it decreases as debts are repaid.

Keynes relied on the notion that somehow the creation of credit would for a time hoodwink everyone into hoarding less, and, as we say nowadays, "jump start" economic activity. But it cannot without the structural change that actually increases productivity, and without that can only be detrimental. The creation of supply in excess of credit, decreases credit, and, likewise, the creation of credit in excess of supply must decrease supply, as it is a disincentive to work, save and invest. So any recovery program has to look at structural change to increase productivity and the reduction of non-productive expenditure. This is what I assume the ruling parties in Britain are doing, and many particularly in this country have yet to comprehend.

doodah  09/13/2010 09:56 AM Report

That's what I was saying, it's ridiculous to call President Obama a 'Keynesian', because Hawaii is in America, Kenya is not.

NeilMacCallister  09/13/2010 08:37 AM Report

Speaking for myself, doodah, ..I care not a whit where our President's great uncle may have once resided. I have no idea where my own did.

Our President does go back to Hawaii quite often, ..as I believe is both good and proper.

His finely-suited circlings in Washington, New York, and from Hyannis Port to Kennebunkport, ..shows him to be as identically American as anyone else now walking those halls of Congress.

We all just do what we're good at.

Good luck.

PokerCat  09/12/2010 08:26 PM Report

OK, while I am sure I have nothing better to do that than to add to the eternal internet flame war, I actually want to call attention to the fact the the video will not load.

Imagine that I actually wanted to watch it, and not just rant.

The flash file name should be "091010_700k.flv". The inital "0" is missing.

You can delete my comment once you fix it.

doodah  09/12/2010 06:53 AM Report

LMAO!!! Bravo! Bravo!

One intellectual Brit on the 'John Mclaughlin Group' show last night kept insisting that Obama has NOT been 'Keynesian' enough. I say, 'If he were anymore 'Keynesian' maybe he should just move back to 'Kenya'.

uh vadda voom vadda bing .. and a nyot nyot nyot

NeilMacCallister  09/12/2010 06:29 AM Report

Dear Mr. Gelles,

President Obama promises to promptly attend to your request for increased transfer payments to America's many new poor, as soon as he returns from his golfing weekend on Martha's Vineyard.

Please just continue your patience until then, for we promise you that the President is right now conferring with his caddies for their advice on improving America's now absolutely destroyed job market.

Until then, please just continue to trust in our great 'American-know-how', ..and keep paying your taxes, if you can!

Remember, .."Good lives await those who contribute."

And please note, ..we do accept your check, or money order!

Thank you so much,

Signed,

The 2 Democrats who still care about their seats in Congress

JohnGelles  09/12/2010 04:53 AM Report

George Osborne needs to read this too: it is addressed to all parliamentary democracies whose liquidity systems can be addressed for emergency spending in this trying time of demand deficits all around the world.

=====================================

Mr. President: Please Demand Immediate Tax Cuts for the Working Poor

Mr. President, we can cut FICA and Income taxes on the currently working poor. This can include refund of prior payments as well. This will not be welfare--it will be tax relief--that can also relieve enough constraints on spending by the working poor to help the nation reduce the current jobs and demand deficits.

Demand this tax relief of congress and declare national mobilization for increased federal relief of the 50 states and for higher spending on life-saving robotic weapons to protect our troops at war.

Continue to give Hell to lawmakers who say NO to the American people, their workers and warriors, just to reverse our victories at the polls in 2008 and 2006. Let us continue these victories in 2010 by reducing all taxes on the working poor.

They need such relief and their higher spending will cost the nation no cash--and pass NO debt on to others. The accounts of all the working poor concerned will suffer no loss in value--as we keep these accounts current by liquidity transfers to them--to match this emergency funding for the sake of economic and national security.

NOTE: This plea and demand has also been posted to the White House OFA Blog from supporters of American economic and national security.

Gustav  09/11/2010 07:09 AM Report

America is not England. And what he said was we can't rely soley on governments to have all the answers.

America, as I see it, has previously viewed it as if governments have NO answers.

NeilMacCallister  09/11/2010 02:03 AM Report

Thank you, Mr. Rose, ..this Englander actually DID have something to say to us Americans: "Don't bankrupt yourself with big government spending!"

He sounds like Allan Meltzer!!!

Thank you, Mr. Rose!