A Need To Re-Think Legislative Revenue Analysis

Glad I didn't have coffee. Would have splattered the screen. This link has extremely heavy gack values. Was on my way out the door to enjoy some golf when this cut across my screen.

"Tax increases would help state economy more than cuts, report finds"

I know that Lewis and Clark College has economics classes. I didn't know that any of its graduates found meaningful employment as a result of those classes, that is, any marketable skill as a result of those classes that would end in someone willing to offer any such graduate a job with a paycheck.

Obviously, I was wrong.

"Legislative Revenue Officer Paul Warner said raising taxes and cutting state spending both have the effect of “pulling dollars out of the revenue stream” in Oregon’s economy.

"But cutting state government spending slows the economy more because those paying the higher taxes — corporations and well-off households — would otherwise have kept a portion of those dollars out of the Oregon economy, either spending it out of state or keeping it in savings, the office concluded.

"A state government “spending decrease has a larger negative impact on the economy than a tax increase does,” Warner said while presenting the report to a legislative panel."

The state obviously doesn't hire on the basis of any real world experience. Which goes a way to explaining how we got to where we are today.

Old People Who Don't Like Country-Western

I'm a pretty "traditional values" kinda guy. And I've liked country music for years.

I still run into people who look down their nose at me when I tell them that I like country. It's like admitting to marrying your cousin to these folks. But, the kids dig it.

So here's a recent music video for a newly released country single. Mebbe it's time for the old folks to get over it.



Oh, I also like this.



I enjoy the finger popping. Enjoy your weekend. Call your parents.

Ordered Mine Today

You can buy this book at Amazon--where it is currently #1--or at Barnes and Noble, where I purchased mine (where it is also currently #1.)

I prefer Barnes and Noble since it remains a brick and mortar business. I pre-ordered because I'm afraid that demand for this book will be such that unless I pre-ordered, the chances of getting 1st edition were diminishing quickly. Too quickly to be assured of that 1st edition thingy. Most of the books I buy are 1st editions, since they are read but also treated as investments. Among my firsts are Satanic Verses and Burr. Which I mention since Gore Vidal was recently in the news.

Joining the "club" didn't make much sense for me, since, again, I prefer to shop at brick and mortar stores.

Two reasons to buy today: the 1st edition thing, and; I want to send tingles up the leg of Chris Matthews.

Guns

If you haven't had any training in Constitutional Law, here is a brief outline of the debate.

The question is referred to as "incorporation". That is, the rights outlined in the Constitution cannot be denied to U.S. citizens living in their separate states, or through their state's laws denied by local or municapal authorities.

If you want to really dig in, Volokh has a reading list here.

I think the timing for this is good. And you should be aware of the impact that a decision that incorporates the 2nd Amendment will have on other rights that you assume you have as a result of your U.S. citizenship.

Gene Pitney

The young have problems

Many problems

We need an understanding heart

Why don't they help us, try to help us

Before this clay and granite planet falls apart

Get a job, hippy.

Wait for the Surprise Ending

Climate Change: Oops!

Patrick Michaels writes;

"Now begins the fun. Warwick Hughes, an Australian scientist, wondered where that “+/–” came from, so he politely wrote Phil Jones in early 2005, asking for the original data. Jones’s response to a fellow scientist attempting to replicate his work was, 'We have 25 years or so invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?'”

Indeed.

Why would scientists want to find "something wrong with it"?

Defend the data, so that you can defend your conclusions. Reminiscent of Pons and Fleischmann. Worse, look at the graphic above. What happens when you suppress some of the data? And why would you do that?

Cherry picking. Any graduate candidate that got caught cherry picking his data for his thesis would be compelled to leave. It simply isn't done. It is a violation of academic standards.

So my question is, are there still teachers and professors pushing this garbage on their students? Academic freedom is tied to academic responsibility. We give the academy freedom because they hold certain truths to be inviolable.

Seems there's been some violating going on.

UPDATE: Seems Strata has the same problems I have. Imagine.

UPDATE: Seems Purple Avenger noticed this, too.