14 September 2015

Labor Market Tightness

Just a quick update:

With the fall in headline unemployment to 5.1% and the robust gains in monthly jobs numbers, many commentators are looking for the Federal Reserve to raise the target Fed Funds rate. This flies in the face, of course, of the other half of the Fed's dual mandate (stable prices), as headline inflation is still well below their alleged 2% target.

It is instructive, then, to look at other metrics. Below is a measure of unemployed persons per job opening. This, of course, does not include the marginally attached or those employed part-time for economic reasons.


This is very encouraging in and of itself, but anemic wage growth still indicates the time for tightening is a ways off.

10 August 2015

Heritage = Hate, at least some of the time

I have a hard time wrapping my head around the dichotomy between 'heritage' and 'hate' in these discussions. Why exactly are these two ideas supposed to be mutually exclusive? I guess it's mainly because we've never really tried to reckon with slavery since the mid 1870s, and the effects of our collective head-in-the-sand explain pretty much all of the so-called 'problems with race' in the US since.

We've got dozens of Holocaust memorials and museums in the United States, which I think is a reflection both of the long history of Jewish culture in the US and of the role the US played in ending the Holocaust. On the other hand, we've got very few memorials to slaves, and virtually no museums to teach this important, painful, and essential part of our nation's history.

Germany has also got some Holocaust memorials and museums to help them sort out what that period means in their history. Eric Foner pointed out that if Germany had built a big bunch of memorials and museums to American slavery before they built any for the Holocaust, it might look as if they were trying to hide something.

29 June 2015

It's really hard to rank 'worst days,' Sen. Cruz edition

Sen. Cruz: "Today is some of the darkest 24 hours in our nation's history," referring to the Supreme Court's dual rulings against a suit opposing healthcare expansion and against laws than forbid gay marriage.


I get it that people have different political opinions, and that to people like Sen. Cruz, marriages such as their own can only be valuable if other people cannot have them, and healthcare is only worth having if there is a class of people who cannot have that either.

That said, I'm having a lot of trouble wrapping my head around the, uh, unique ideological requirements of the view that the Court's ruling against those opinions is of a piece with Pearl Harbor, Sept. 11, The Challenger and Columbia disasters, the San Francisco earthquake, the Galveston hurricane, the Dred Scott decision, and the assault on Fort Sumter. (Well, I guess I admit I can see how Sen. Cruz thinks these two rulings are worse than Dred Scott and Sumter.)

No, the part of Sen. Cruz's statement that is so baffling to this correspondent is that it's really hard to argue that, regardless of one's views, these two rulings marked even the worst 24-hour period in America this month. I guess it's possible that Sen. Cruz's views on whether or not universal healthcare and marriage are worse than racist terrorism are still not fully settled. I think for him to elucidate this further would be a public service.

19 June 2015

Violent Hate Crimes Involve Both Hatred and Violence

The photo below appeared recently on the Facebook page of a far-right group called "Young Americans for Liberty."


It features a quote attributed to actor Samuel L. Jackson:
I don't think it's about more gun control. I grew up in the south with guns everywhere and we never shot anyone. This [shooting] is about people who aren't taught the value of life.
This is a cute sentiment, but it presupposes that events such as the terrorist attack on the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, SC cannot be about both too many guns and too little respect for life. After all, the U.S. hasn't got a monopoly on hate; plenty of other Western industrialized nations have as many problems with hate as we do, but do not have anything close to the problems with gun violence that we've got.

09 April 2015

The Grocer, the Generals, and the End

Thinking today of Wilmer McLean, a veteran of the Virginia militia who was making a living as a grocer in Manassas in the summer of 1861 when General P. G. T. Beauregard, known as “the Creole,” commandeered his home to use as a headquarters. This occupation attracted the attentions of General Irvin McDowell and his enthusiastic, yet green Union volunteers, who were eager to make quick work of the rebels and get back their homes. The reach of Gen. McDowell and his men unfortunately exceeded their grasp, and the Creole handed the Union its first decisive defeat in the first major battle of the new war. Legend holds that a Union cannonball came down Mr. McLean’s kitchen chimney in the course of the shelling. After the battle, Mr. McLean moved his family south to both improve his business prospects, and to avoid being quite so much in the middle of a conflict that few believed would still be active almost four years later.

Mr. McLean could not help but appreciate the irony, then, when, on the afternoon of 9 April 1865, Colonel Charles Marshall, an aide to General Robert E. Lee of the Army of Northern Virginia, knocked upon the door of his family’s new home in Appomattox Court House, Virginia, and asked if the house could be used as the venue for Gen. Lee’s surrender to General Ulysses S. Grant. Mr. McLean reluctantly acceded, saying in his later years that the Civil War "started in my front yard and ended in my front parlor."

The Civil War did not truly end with Gen. Lee’s surrender one hundred fifty years ago today, of course, but once the Army of Northern Virginia was no more, the end of the war was both ordained and in sight.

08 April 2015

Pheidippides Paul, and other Legends

Many libertarians in the United States seem to believe that effective communication is the missing piece of the revolution they seek in American politics. The notion, I think, is that the libertarian definition of freedom holds an inherently wide appeal, and if more people heard their message, libertarians would sweep into office across the land. That this fantasy endures speaks to the epistemic closure that pervades fringe movements.

Libertarianism is inherently an opposition ideology. In terms of practical politics, that means opposition to social insurance, opposition to military intervention, and opposition to monetary policy, chiefly. The first obstacle to the libertarian revolution is that these broad policy categories are all fairly popular. When any specific provision of, say, social insurance actually approaches the chopping block, as Medicare did recently, opposition to the cut in question overwhelms opposition to the program.

The second obstacle, as identified by Nate Cohn, is that self-identified libertarians often do not vote, and when they do, they do not reliably vote for self-identified libertarian politicians. Mr Cohn theorizes that "'libertarianism' has become a catchall phrase for iconoclasts of all political stripes." Therefore, the target audience of self-identified libertarian politicians (nominal Republicans, in every case) is a subset of the approximately 11% of the population that identifies as libertarian, namely the fraction that can be counted upon to vote Republican.

An implied third obstacle is that any politician that chooses that thorny path is placing a wager that the total volume of voters that their libertarian message attracts is greater than the total volume that it repels. A tall order indeed.


Update: Professor Mankiw weighs in, but manages to refer to Ron Paul when he clearly intends to refer to Rand Paul. Professor Freud has no comment.