All Things in Moderation

Morning Report 10/15/12

54 Responses

1. 

   Mike, on October 15, 2012 at 8:12 am said:

   The faux Nobel Prize in Economics goes to Shapley and Roth for work on “matching methods” — useful for matching residents to med school programs, organ donors and recipients.

   I wonder if Match.com and/or eHarmony also uses this type of algorithm ….

   LikeLike

   Reply
2. 

   bannedagain5446, on October 15, 2012 at 9:51 am said:

   BAD NEWS/GOOD NEWS DEPARTMENT:

   “The largest 100 U.S. public pension funds have around $1.2 trillion of unfunded liabilities, about $300 billion above the nearly $900 billion they reported themselves, according to a new actuarial study to be released on Monday.

   The pension systems reported a median funding level of 75.1 percent. The study by the actuarial firm Milliman, which used different ways to value assets and measure liabilities, finds an aggregate level of funding of 67.8 percent.

   But Milliman, one of the world largest actuarial firms took a close look at U.S. public pension funding for the first time, and said the multibillion-dollar difference was good news.

   Rebecca Sielman, the report’s author, said results should reassure the public that America’s public pensions in general are accurately reporting their funding shortfalls. ”

   http://www.cnbc.com/id/49416217

   I don’t actually feel all that reassured though.

   LikeLike

   Reply
3. 

   Brent Nyitray, on October 15, 2012 at 9:58 am said:

   8% assumed rate of return on plan assets… Yeah, right.

   LikeLike

   Reply
4. 

   Michigoose, on October 15, 2012 at 10:22 am said:

   I wonder if Match.com and/or eHarmony also uses this type of algorithm ….

   I heard on the radio this morning that Shapley’s original interest was predicting the marriage “market”. Hmmmmmmmmm

   LikeLike

   Reply
5. 

   Mike, on October 15, 2012 at 10:23 am said:

   Stockman loses his cool about LBOs and, by extension, WMR.

   That is the modus operandi of the leveraged-buyout business, and in an honest free-market economy, there wouldn’t be much scope for it because it creates little of economic value. But we have a rigged system—a regime of crony capitalism—where the tax code heavily favors debt and capital gains, and the central bank purposefully enables rampant speculation by propping up the price of financial assets and battering down the cost of leveraged finance.

   So the vast outpouring of LBOs in recent decades has been the consequence of bad policy, not the product of capitalist enterprise. I know this from 17 years of experience doing leveraged buyouts at one of the pioneering private-equity houses, Blackstone, and then my own firm. I know the pitfalls of private equity. The whole business was about maximizing debt, extracting cash, cutting head counts, skimping on capital spending, outsourcing production, and dressing up the deal for the earliest, highest-profit exit possible. Occasionally, we did invest in genuine growth companies, but without cheap debt and deep tax subsidies, most deals would not make economic sense.

   In truth, LBOs are capitalism’s natural undertakers—vulture investors who feed on failing businesses. Due to bad policy, however, they have now become monsters of the financial midway that strip-mine cash from healthy businesses and recycle it mostly to the top 1 percent.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • 

     ScottC, on October 15, 2012 at 10:37 am said:

     Mike (from Stockman):

     …and recycle it mostly to the top 1 percent.

     It is populist pandering like this that makes me discount everything else he says.

     LikeLike

     Reply
6. 

   bannedagain5446, on October 15, 2012 at 10:33 am said:

   With Romney surging in the polls, the WSJ decides the time is right to call for self-segregation to go along with self-deportation.

   “The Unraveling of Affirmative Action”

   “The most encouraging part of this research is the parallel finding that these same students have dramatically better outcomes if they go to schools where their level of academic preparation is much closer to that of the median student. That is, black and Hispanic students — as well as the smaller numbers of preferentially admitted athletes and children of donors — excel when they avoid the problem of what has come to be called ‘mismatch.’ ”

   http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444799904578050901460576218.html?mod=googlenews_ws

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • 

     ScottC, on October 15, 2012 at 11:00 am said:

     the WSJ decides the time is right to call for self-segregation to go along with self-deportation.

     For those of you interested in the truth, I suggest you actually read the article. The racial-preference reforms called for in the article could not in any sense at all fairly be described as a call for “self-segregation”, and in fact the authors specifically point out a study which suggests that it is the very affirmative action policies under criticism which themselves promote self-segregation, which the authors implicitly decry.

     From the article:

     But it turns out that these effects are also heavily influenced by the presence of large preferences. Economics professor Peter Arcidiacono and his colleagues at Duke University found in a 2011 study that students were much more likely to become friends with classmates they saw as academically similar to themselves. Students with large preferences were more likely to self-segregate and find themselves socially isolated.

     The reason wasn’t racism. At Duke University, for example, large numbers of whites and blacks formed friendships at the outset of college. But for those with large academic gaps, the friendships atrophied. Using their multischool results, Mr. Arcidiacono and his colleagues concluded that smaller preferences at the most selective schools would tend to increase both the likelihood and the number of cross-racial friendships at elite schools in general, despite declines in the numbers of black and Hispanic students at the most elite schools.

     LikeLike

     Reply
7. 

   Brent Nyitray, on October 15, 2012 at 11:05 am said:

   It is populist pandering like this that makes me discount everything else he says.

   Pushing for Geithner’s job if obama wins, obviously.

   He reminds me a little of Teddy Forstman in “Barbarians at the Gate”

   LikeLike

   Reply
8. 

   bannedagain5446, on October 15, 2012 at 11:13 am said:

   “Mr. Arcidiacono and his colleagues concluded that smaller preferences at the most selective schools would tend to increase both the likelihood and the number of cross-racial friendships at elite schools in general, despite declines in the numbers of black and Hispanic students at the most elite schools”

   Translation when there’s only one black or Hispanic guy,people fall all over themselves to be his friend and get their picture taken with him for Facebook.

   I call that the “lunch lady effect”. It’s been my experience at major concerns when the only minority face is in the serivce category executives fall all over themselves to be friendly to them at work, even going so far as to speak to them in a dialect or use some version of a supposed black handshake to greet them.

   Why, because they confirm the “established order” of things and pose no threat. However, you rarely see this when there are substantial proportions of minority respresentation.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • 

     ScottC, on October 15, 2012 at 11:27 am said:

     For some reason I am reminded of Gary Larson.

     LikeLike

     Reply
9. 

   Mike, on October 15, 2012 at 11:22 am said:

   Scott:

   It is populist pandering like this that makes me discount everything else he says.

   Didn’t think you’d make it that far. I thought you’d pick up on the hypocrisy of one of the architects of Reaganomics bemoaning someone else leveraging the resultant cheap debt and favorable tax treatments to make huge profits.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • 

     markinaustin, on October 15, 2012 at 12:32 pm said:

     Brent, Mike, and Scott – this was the guy who invented ketchup and pickle relish as vegetables in the school lunch program. He may not be a supply sider any more but he is an old fashioned traditional conservative who hates the Fed and EZ money and he could never work in a BHO Admin.

     I could see him with Gary Johnson, however. This is a guy who said something like he would only invest in stuff Bernanke could not influence.

     Addendum: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/08/how-david-stockman-became-democrats-favorite-reaganite/261121/

     LikeLike

     Reply
10. 

    bannedagain5446, on October 15, 2012 at 11:28 am said:

    “Mark Zandi believes that the deleveraging process is largely over.”

    Zandi is the Robert Duvall of economists. Just tell him before air what role you want him to assume and he will hit the mark every time.

    LikeLike

    Reply
11. 

    bannedagain5446, on October 15, 2012 at 11:36 am said:

    scott

    I thought you meant this Gary Larsen!

    The Soul Of The Game: The Purple People Eaters

    LikeLike

    Reply
12. 

    Michigoose, on October 15, 2012 at 12:25 pm said:

    And more ballot suppression by Republicans:

    Around the country, Republican operatives have been making moves to keep Mr. Johnson from becoming their version of Ralph Nader, the Green Party candidate whose relatively modest support cut into Al Gore’s 2000 vote arguably enough to help hand the decisive states of Ohio and Florida to George W. Bush.

    The fear of Mr. Johnson’s tipping the outcome in an important state may explain why an aide to Mr. Romney ran what was effectively a surveillance operation into Mr. Johnson’s efforts over the summer to qualify for the ballot at the Iowa State Fair, providing witnesses to testify in a lawsuit to block him that ultimately fizzled.

    Libertarians suspect it is why Republican state officials in Michigan blocked Mr. Johnson from the ballot after he filed proper paperwork three minutes after his filing deadline.

    And it is why Republicans in Pennsylvania hired a private detective to investigate his ballot drive in Philadelphia, appearing at the homes of paid canvassers and, in some cases, flashing an F.B.I. badge — he was a retired agent — while asking to review the petitions they gathered at $1 a signature, according to testimony in the case and interviews.

    I’m not positive, but I’d be willing to bet that a retired agent isn’t supposed to be flashing his badge when he’s working as a private detective.

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • 

      markinaustin, on October 15, 2012 at 12:38 pm said:

      How many states do not have GJ on the ballot, Kelley?

      LikeLike

      Reply
      • 

        markinaustin, on October 15, 2012 at 12:42 pm said:

        Last comment for now. My appraiser friend says that the pressure is on again to inflate appraisals, now that banks are lending. Surprisingly, at first blush, the lenders themselves are pushing the inflated appraisals, because they want to make the loans, ostensibly.

        LikeLike

        Reply
      • 

        ScottC, on October 15, 2012 at 12:51 pm said:

        mark:

        Johnson is on the ballot in 48 states. Such suppression!

        LikeLike

        Reply
13. 

    Mike, on October 15, 2012 at 1:18 pm said:

    Mark:

    Tomato paste is still considered a vegetable in the school lunch program.

    LikeLike

    Reply
14. 

    Michigoose, on October 15, 2012 at 1:19 pm said:

    What Scott said. Not on Michigan, because he filed his signatures three minutes after the deadline and the Republicans challenged it:

    Libertarians suspect it is why Republican state officials in Michigan blocked Mr. Johnson from the ballot after he filed proper paperwork three minutes after his filing deadline.

    And he isn’t on the ballot in Oklahoma just because he isn’t. okie might have some insight into that.

    LikeLike

    Reply
15. 

    Michigoose, on October 15, 2012 at 1:20 pm said:

    Scott:

    Call it what you will, but the Republicans at the state level in several states are doing everything in their power to make it very difficult for anybody to be able to vote for anyone that doesn’t have an R after their name.

    LikeLike

    Reply
16. 

    Mike, on October 15, 2012 at 1:26 pm said:

    banned:

    I thought you meant this Gary Larsen!

    No, Scott’s just trying to diss me by saying my posts addressed to him are just “Scott” and then unintelligible blather.

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • 

      ScottC, on October 15, 2012 at 1:47 pm said:

      Mike:

      Scott’s just trying to diss me…

      Not at all. It wasn’t in response to you at all.

      The point was that no matter what arguments are employed to show the problem with academic racial-preferences, the only thing some people are capable of hearing is “I am a racist”.

      LikeLike

      Reply
17. 

    Troll McWingnut or George, whichever, on October 15, 2012 at 2:07 pm said:

    Michi,

    Is Gary Johnson a candidate your going to be supporting for POTUS? I thought it was Obama? Not a trick question, I just didn’t think Johnson’s domestic agenda would jibe with my understanding of your philosophy.

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • 

      ScottC, on October 15, 2012 at 2:25 pm said:

      McWing:

      Do you suppose this was just a case of R’s masquerading as D’s?

      LikeLike

      Reply
18. 

    Troll McWingnut or George, whichever, on October 15, 2012 at 2:36 pm said:

    Obvious false flag op.

    LikeLike

    Reply
19. 

    jnc4p, on October 15, 2012 at 3:06 pm said:

    “ScottC, on October 15, 2012 at 12:51 pm said:

    mark:

    Johnson is on the ballot in 48 states. Such suppression!”

    Not for lack of trying by the Republicans. It’s not a Republican or Democrat specific, but rather the duopoly against everyone else, ala the debates. The source of the suppression depends on who the third party candidate is most likely to hurt.

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • 

      ScottC, on October 15, 2012 at 4:01 pm said:

      jnc:

      It’s not a Republican or Democrat specific, but rather the duopoly against everyone else, ala the debates.

      Yup. But with the exception of the debates, they haven’t been all that successful. On the ballot in 48 states. Just 9 more to go. 🙂

      LikeLike

      Reply
20. 

    jnc4p, on October 15, 2012 at 3:08 pm said:

    “Brent Nyitray, on October 15, 2012 at 11:05 am said:

    It is populist pandering like this that makes me discount everything else he says.

    Pushing for Geithner’s job if obama wins, obviously.

    He reminds me a little of Teddy Forstman in “Barbarians at the Gate””

    I doubt that. The only administration I could see David Stockman being the Treasury Secretary in would be Ron Paul’s. Money printing by the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates, which is what Stockman places at the heart of the problem, is now bipartisan consensus.

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • 

      markinaustin, on October 15, 2012 at 3:31 pm said:

      JNC, See my comment at 12:32 PM. I think he could serve in a GJ Admin. Do you? This is all hypothetical, of course.

      LikeLike

      Reply
21. 

    Michigoose, on October 15, 2012 at 3:10 pm said:

    McWing:

    Is Gary Johnson a candidate your going to be supporting for POTUS?

    As a protest against the administration’s continuing surveillance of US citizens, yes. But I have the luxury of being able to do that, since my vote doesn’t count at all in UT anyway.

    I actually match up pretty closely with Jill Stein on the issues, but I don’t think she’s on the ballot here.

    LikeLike

    Reply
22. 

    Michigoose, on October 15, 2012 at 3:18 pm said:

    These must all be perfectly lovely places to work, with bosses that really care about their employees. . .

    Although the Koch brothers are known for their outspoken support of the GOP, “Our support is not based on party affiliation, and we support both Republicans and Democrats who support market-based policies and solutions,” Guest’s statement said.

    “In the flyer sent to Oregon employees, all 14 Koch-backed state candidates were Republicans,” In These Times reported. A request for examples of Democratic candidates included on the list of Koch-supported candidates was not answered by press time.

    In recent days, other reports have surfaced of company heads telling workers to vote for Romney in the upcoming election,

    Last week, owner of Westgate Resorts David Siegel sent workers a pro-Romney email that said, “If any new taxes are levied on me, or my company … I will be forced to cut back. This means fewer jobs, less benefits and certainly less opportunity for everyone.”

    MSNBC program Up w/ Chris Hayes reported Sunday on a leaked email from Arthur Allen, president and CEO of ASG Software Solutions, that took a similar tone. “If the US re-elects President Obama, our chances of staying independent are slim to none. … I don’t want to hear any complaints regarding the fallout that will most likely come,” he wrote. The company did not respond to the program’s request for comment.

    And two weeks ago, in a letter to employees obtained by Michigan media outlet MLive.com, president and CEO of auto-parts manufacturer Lacks Enterprises Richard Lacks warned workers that sticking with the current administration would hurt them. “The more government takes the less there will be available to spread around to the working people of this company,” he wrote in reference to “talk of additional tax increases.”

    “It is important that in November you vote to improve your standard of living and that will be through smaller government and less government,” he said.

    LikeLike

    Reply
23. 

    ScottC, on October 15, 2012 at 3:44 pm said:

    In recent days, other reports have surfaced of company heads telling workers to vote for Romney in the upcoming election,

    Good for them. Voters should be as fully informed as possible about where their interests lie, and what the probable consequences of their votes will be, before they vote.

    LikeLike

    Reply
24. 

    Michigoose, on October 15, 2012 at 3:49 pm said:

    Voters should be as fully informed as possible about where their interests lie

    More likely the corporate interests rather than theirs.

    LikeLike

    Reply
25. 

    okiegirl, on October 15, 2012 at 8:27 pm said:

    michi, think about this. What if this turns out to be a “referendum” election? In that regard it’s the popular vote that counts. So a protest vote takes away from that possibility. (mark, that’s for you too.)

    Sigh, I say this as someone who had fully intended to vote Johnson, until the 47% tape came out. Now I think the stakes are too high.

    As for Johnson not being on the ballot in OK, I don’t have anything to offer beyond what you could easily get on google. He didn’t timely get enough signatures (needed 51,000+ but don’t know how many he got). Belatedly, an obscure party in OK nominated him, but it turned out it had formally dissolved as a national party the day before the nomination. So basically the OkSCt ruled that it was no longer an entity that could nominate him.

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • 

      markinaustin, on October 16, 2012 at 8:36 am said:

      Okie =

      What if this turns out to be a “referendum” election? In that regard it’s the popular vote that counts.

      No such thing.

      If there is an electoral vote tie the new HoR, presumably R, will elect WMR as POTUS and the new Senate, presumably D, will elect a D VP. That would be a VP with scope of duty limited to presiding over the Senate, unless a catastrophe befell the Prez.

      Who would the Ds elect as VP? Probably not BHO, who would refuse consideration, I think. Would they elect a placeholder or a young ambitious guy or a bulldog? As to the last, imagine Tony Zinni as VP.

      LikeLike

      Reply
26. 

    Kevin S. Willis, on October 16, 2012 at 6:57 am said:

    I’m still planning on voting for Johnson. I like Obama generally (grade on a curve for a liberal democrat). I don’t like Romney (grading on a negative curve for a supposedly conservative Republican). Of the two politicrats running in the big race, Romney strikes me as the least authentic, although that’s definitely (and deservedly) damning Obama with faint praise.

    That being said, I think (a) Obama wins the election. Squeaker, but he wins. (b) Romney will win Tennessee handily, my protest vote isn’t going to make a difference here, not even a chance. So, I’m going to vote Johnson. Oh, and (c) a Romney presidency will be different from but very, very similar to a 2nd Obama term, in my opinion. There will be some critical policy differences that will have whichever side up in arms, but as a practical matter, Obamacare will become Romneycare, the War on Terror will remain managerial and automated rather than invasions and boots on the ground (or, there will be no more of that under Romney than Obama), and Romney’s tax plans will likely come to naught (and we’ll probably see a Democrat minor sweep of congress in the midterms).

    As regards to corporate heads telling folks to vote for Romney, you think nobody at Google or green energy companies or other tech places don’t know where their bread is buttered.

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • 

      novahockey, on October 16, 2012 at 7:56 am said:

      I think the turnout issue will be decided based on how early states are called on the east coast. No reason for those out west to turn out if this is over early

      LikeLike

      Reply
27. 

    Michigoose, on October 16, 2012 at 9:16 am said:

    Just as a thought experiment, here’s Nate Silver’s take on the chances of an Electoral College tie (vanishingly small):

    The odds of an Electoral College tie are still very small, 1.3 percent according to the FiveThirtyEight forecast. But those odds have risen as Mitt Romney has narrowed President Obama’s lead. At the beginning of October the odds of a tie were 0.6 percent and several weeks before that they were 0.3 percent.

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • 

      markinaustin, on October 16, 2012 at 9:20 am said:

      Kelley, play the electoral tie game – what D do you want for WMR’s VP? Why?

      I would be so tempted to “promote” some old bad D from a safe D CD or state out of his job and into oblivion.

      LikeLike

      Reply
      • 

        ScottC, on October 16, 2012 at 9:28 am said:

        mark:

        I would be so tempted to “promote” some old bad D from a safe D CD or state out of his job and into oblivion.

        Al Gore. Oh, wait….that’s already been done.

        LikeLike

        Reply
28. 

    Mike, on October 16, 2012 at 9:28 am said:

    Mark:

    Alcee Hastings?

    Alan Grayson would be fun just for the spectacle.

    LikeLike

    Reply
29. 

    Michigoose, on October 16, 2012 at 9:38 am said:

    How about one of the Hawaiian senators, Mark? They’re both long past their sell by date, and I doubt that they’ve done anything noteworthy in years.

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • 

      markinaustin, on October 16, 2012 at 11:27 am said:

      Probably easier for the Senate to elect an honest very old Hawaiian Senator than an out and out crook from the HoR in Hastings, who is the biggest embarrassment to electoral politics in America, IMHO, which I think Mike shares.

      Actually, the 12th A, which I had not looked at, says the VP choices are between Ryan and JB. So JB gets the oblivion role. Sorry. It would have been more fun the other way.

      HoR gets to vote among the top three vote getters for POTUS. A chance for Gary Johnson? Nah.

      LikeLike

      Reply
30. 

    ashot, on October 16, 2012 at 9:52 am said:

    I was seriously considering voting for Johnson, but he is not on the ballot here in Michigan. Depending on what you read, that is either his fault or Republican’s fault or some combination thereof. It’s a shame and will, unless something radical happens in the next few weeks, lead to a vote for Obama that may have gone elsewhere.

    LikeLike

    Reply
31. 

    novahockey, on October 16, 2012 at 9:54 am said:

    if he’s not on the ballot, write in.

    LikeLike

    Reply
32. 

    ashot, on October 16, 2012 at 10:55 am said:

    nova- That’s actually a suggestion I intend to look into because it’s not clear to me that writing in his name will be counted. According to my 2 minutes of research a write in vote will count “if the party forwards the names of the candidates, a list of the party’s presidential electors and “Declaration of Intent” forms executed by the candidates to the Secretary of State by September 7, 2012. I know there is still some legal wrangling going on with respect to Johnson so I do not know, yet, if it would count. I should probably just call the SoS.

    LikeLike

    Reply
33. 

    Michigoose, on October 16, 2012 at 11:17 am said:

    Or just vote for Obama, ashot. 🙂 At least you live in a state where it counts!

    LikeLike

    Reply
34. 

    novahockey, on October 16, 2012 at 11:20 am said:

    Is Michigan in play now?

    LikeLike

    Reply
35. 

    Michigoose, on October 16, 2012 at 11:47 am said:

    nova–I guess not. Nate gives it a 94.4% chance of going for Obama. For some reason I thought it was slipping.

    LikeLike

    Reply
36. 

    ashot, on October 16, 2012 at 11:51 am said:

    I think early on some thought Michigan would be in play, but Romney is not popular here.

    LikeLike

    Reply
37. 

    novahockey, on October 16, 2012 at 11:52 am said:

    i’ll admit ignorance on how Nate’s model works. MI is a toss up on the RCP map. so somebody is wrong — maybe that’s why you thought its being contended?

    LikeLike

    Reply
38. 

    jnc4p, on October 16, 2012 at 8:17 pm said:

    “okiegirl, on October 15, 2012 at 8:27 pm said:

    michi, think about this. What if this turns out to be a “referendum” election?”
    
    I doubt there will be a “referendum” effect as long as there is divided government. I don’t see either party taking the House, Senate and the Presidency this cycle.

    LikeLike

    Reply