Currency of Ideas: No entry found

Posted by: Jennifer Cabe • July 08, 2010

We are in a much deeper economic pit than the US stock market growth and nascent economic signs of recovery suggest. Beyond that, we are tied to a global financial system that remains very, very fragile.

Posted by: Melanie Bouer • July 08, 2010

I don't need the jobs report to tell me that the economy is on shaky ground and that businesses won't be hiring until the uncertainty on what the government is going to do next is eased. There is no light at the end of the tunnel in spite of all the positive proclamations by the President and his staff. Once people see there is potential for free-enterprise (without Government mandates), a reduction in federal spending and tax breaks for business; jobs will recover, purchasing will recover and we'll be on the road to prosperity.

Posted by: Jen Auer • July 08, 2010

Yep, it is time to lower tax rates to increase business production as well as redoing those Organize Labor laws to make business more profitable. I guess Pelosio should start being a business woman for the US and not mother hen who steals from Dad's wallet to pays for things for those unproductive kids.

Posted by: Samuel Zell • July 08, 2010

Governments can't continue to prime forever in the form of State jobs, quantitative easing, cash for clunkers etc.., and globally State spending has to contract aggressively for confidence in countries' ability to service debt repayments to return.

Posted by: Brooks Harrington • July 08, 2010

As the fog clears over Albany, state government's financial landscape is no less troubling.

Posted by: Graham Hughes • July 08, 2010

Each year since 1969, Congress has spent more money than its income. The Treasury Department has to borrow money to meet Congress's appetite.

Posted by: Fariba Fischel-Ghodsian • July 08, 2010

Now is not the time to end deficit spending in the United States. In fact, slapping the economy with budget austerity in a misguided rush to balance the federal books could freeze the fragile bud of the recovery, creating a dreaded double-dip recession. It could even throw the nation into a second Great Depression.

Posted by: Rebekah Young • July 08, 2010

We need a combination of deep cuts and strategic revenue (yes, taxes) increases.

Posted by: Marc Ufberg • July 08, 2010

We are in the same position as last year. Democratic leaders' proposals to close the shortfall focuses on borrowing and a new levy on oil. Republicans only want to consider cuts.

Posted by: Samuel Zell • July 08, 2010

If it�s Summer, it must be time for another budget crisis in California. Hopefully, they don't try and borrow their way out of the crisis.

Posted by: Doug Wilson • July 08, 2010

It's D�j� Vu all over again. The California budget process is stymied by both political parties with no compromise in sight.

Posted by: Noel Chun • October 23, 2010

This issue needs to be urgently addressed. There are promising ideas here, however, there should be NO guarantees for public sector workers. They should have 403(b) plans and take their chances just like everyone else.

Posted by: Michael Genest • October 25, 2010

"Carrick thinks other states that are now wrestling with immigration will eventually follow California's lead and support a path to citizenship." The elite are out of touch and Carrick's statement is a case in point. There is a visceral, yet justified reaction to illegal immigrants receiving government services and a chance to flout the law by any form of amnesty. A sense of fairness, not any racial or cultural bias, tells the vast majority of Americans that the only correct path to citizenship starts in the immigrant's home country. If they came here illegally, they should be deported. At the point they want to return, we could think about amnesty, but never while they are here illegally. This issue won't go away no matter how "progressive" the country becomes because it is grounded in a fundamental sense of what is right.

Posted by: Andrew Chua • December 14, 2010

Mr Passell with all due respects, are we underestimating the Chinese Governments control over its people and the Chinese people's complacency to resolve this matter for the common good of their nation? Keeping in mind that in most countries there will always be opposition, but isnt this a positive sign. Look at how they handled Tibet...

Posted by: Alex Du • January 04, 2011

Apparently, the market is responding to your concerns, as treasury yields on the long end have been shooting up ever since this note. :) While the banking system may be awash in liquidity, I doubt if every guys in the streets are. Last time I checked, Wells Fargo Bank was selling $79 billion in Fed funds (at an average yield of 0.39%, as a matter of fact). Banks are not lending, and I guess that�s where real money is (or is not) created as far as money-driven inflation is concerned. Average Joe, such as me, is just wondering: while everybody says the Fed is printing money a mass, how come I�m not one penny richer? :) QE II won�t solve unemployment not just because of the two reasons that IMF found. The current high unemployment rate in the US may have nothing to do with lack of liquidity to begin with. Corporate America is not short of cash. On the very contrary, they are sitting on a mountain of liquidity so to speak. As of Q3 2010, Russell 1000 companies� % of cash to market cap was 32%, almost the highest level since 1988. Corporate America has very strong balance sheet, to say the least, but that�s not a motivation to hire. Fed�s exit strategy? They may not have one and they may not need one. It�s extremely difficult (and dangerous) to say �this time it�s different� but I�m wondering if some secular change is happening in the economic system regarding the whole meaning and nature of monetary intermediation. I�m not intellectually equipped to �challenge the conventional wisdom� in classic economics. But hard facts to naked eyes do raise questions sometimes. At the very least, social, political and many other factors play a role. Value of US dollar doesn�t just react to action of Dept. of Treasury. It also reacts to, sometimes very swiftly, action of Dept. of Defense, who does not always behave like a prudent man as defined by school of Adam Smith.

Posted by: Alex Du • January 05, 2011

The high savings rate in China seems to have a long history, longer than shift to market-oriented economy or one-child policy. I guess it reflected the chronically high systematic risk embedded in the society, i.e., lack of credit and market mechanism, lack of able and stable government, etc. On the other hand, it appears to me that many countries with long history of civilization have some kind of habit of saving. Indians are know for their appetite for gold, and Italian households have the highest net worth to annual income ratio among all developed Euro countries. Last, I don�t know how these Chinese �savings� are calculated. I do know, from my personal experience, that many of individual bank savings accounts in China actually belong to institutions/groups that have �good reasons� to put their money this way.

Posted by: Bruce Berry • March 13, 2011

bravo, Mr. Passell

Posted by: Skip Rimer • May 12, 2011

I'll believe in real tax reform when I see it.

Posted by: William Prigge • May 12, 2011

I like potatoes.

Posted by: Lauri Elliott • May 20, 2011

On the whole I agree with these comments. I also believe that organizations are beginning to realize this transformation as FDI into Africa has topped official aid in recent years. For example, at a panel discussion of our recent book, "Redefining Business in the New Africa: Shifting Strategies to be Successful (www.redefining-business-in-the-new-africa.com)" hosted by the World Bank last month, one key question the WB staff had for us is what role did we see development organizations having in the context of growth being driven by investment and private sector?" To me this was quite telling of the shift in paradigms and understanding about investment taking the lead in the future. And I agree with De Lorenzo, it is innovation and creativity (intellectual capital) which has provided the greatest rate of wealth creation for the last few decades so that should be the primary driver, however, I also believe that the natural resources can be used to bolster economies in the short to medium term.

Posted by: Richard Otte • June 15, 2011

I would like to add that we need to do a better job of ensuring young people know what the opportunities are for them in various careers and professions are so they can make wise choices. I believe many young people today get trained for positions that have limited demand. At the Bachelors level, we need more engineers, but young people avoid that training for various reasons that are often not valid. More specifically, we need more software engineers and, contrary to much popular opinion, not all software jobs are going offshore!! Related is the young person that earns a degree in English literature or Sociology or some liberal art. While that is often seen as an easier road to a degree, the opportunities for a high paying career are fewer. In summary, it would help the younger generation make wise training and career choices if better data on the prospects for various careers were widely available to them. Unfortunately, I think many of them do not have the information or understand the benefit of making a wise choice.

Posted by: John Weaver • June 15, 2011

Dramatic healthy change occurs when individuals are encouraged and enabled (E&E) to make 10 things abundant, available and affordable (AAA) in forms that encourage and enable individuals. To be healthy this must be done without using force, entrapment (or enslavement), deception or scarcity (FEDS) in any disguise. The ten things that need to be available in form that encourages and enables the individual are energy, transportation, protection from the environment (heat, cold, floods, earthquakes etc..), education, trade, raw materials, recreation, protection of individuals and nature from predation and being led into harm�s way (includes health-care), communication and food. Every individual will profit from such action by any individual in any amount. There is plenty for every individual to do and change every waking hour, be one employed or not. Every healthy effort helps. If most individuals (including rich) realize they will enjoy far more in a healthy world, they will follow these simplistic principles like a human constitution and enjoy health, prosperity and happiness. Continuing to believe that health, prosperity and happiness is achieved by encouraging and enabling self and others to take and claim from makers and nature by using FEDS (the opposites of nonviolence, freedom, truth and plenty) has not and will not solve our many problems. Do the math� John Weaver MD

Posted by: John Weaver • June 15, 2011

Posted by: Tim O'Connell • June 16, 2011

If one goes back to the 1990s and looks at the long term trends in housing costs (prices times interest rates -- it is really the monthly cost that matters most), and incomes, you see that the market has a long way to do down before it will again be balanced. The Housing Bubble did not pop, it has a slow leak, and the federal homebuyer tax credit was like a patch that stopped the deflation for a short time, making it appear that the market had hit bottom. Now that the tax credit is gone, the leak is once again apparent. When mortgage interest rates begin to climb again (they are already much higher than the real cost of money), the rate of housing price deflation will accelerate until real housing costs come back into a reasonable relationship with incomes. Anyone who compares the cost of buying versus renting housing will find (as I did) that it makes very little sense to purchase a home right now (the NYTimes has a good tool on their Website http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/business/buy-rent-calculator.html). The Housing Bubble is still far too inflated along the coasts, where most people live. Buying makes sense in the Heartland, between the Rockies and Appalachians, but not overall. Yes, speculation is part of the problem, and those investors will either get caught with big losses (if they are relying on short-term profits) or they will hold the housing as rentals over the long-term. In the meantime, the responsible thing is to help everyone realize was is really going on, so that the empty housing stock being held off the market by banks and others who think that somehow the Housing Bubble will re-inflate and allow them to recapture the illusory gains of the early 2000s can come to their senses and return that housing to market, either as rental homes or reasonably priced for sale homes. It was a Bubble -- someone is going to take the loss. We would all be better off if pundits, researchers and investors stopped wringing their hands in despair, while begging to be saved from their bad decisions, and moved on.

Posted by: Rob Kraft • June 17, 2011

I don't understand how tax credits to big businesses will provide them incentive to create more jobs. The bulk of all recommended tax incentives would be granted to large corporations like Exxon, GE, Apple, and Google. These are companies that already pay an effective tax rate of 0%, that are sitting on mountains of cash, and yet are not hiring. How will giving them even more cash incent these companies to hire more workers? Economic theory needs to realize that a business does not base hiring decisions on how much idle cash they have, instead, they base the decision on the ability to earn a profit on the worker. Businesses are not benevolent job creators. They hire a worker for $50,000 a year when they estimate they can increase revenues by $70,000 from the worker's output. Job growth is not returning because it was already dwindling and the recession hastened it. For the last 40 years the U.S. has been doing 3 things that cost jobs: 1) Using automation to replace people, 2) Outsourcing to cheaper labor in other countries, 3) Consolidating large businesses to reduce labor costs and increase profits of owners (not decrease price of goods sold). Consequently this has the additional negative side effects of putting all our eggs in one basket, and creating companies too big to fail. It also creates companies too big and powerful for the U.S. Government to affect.

Posted by: Peter Millington • June 23, 2011

As a freshman advisor at a premier academic and research university, I encountered some first and second year students who had chosen their majors according to their planned graduate education or professional degree programs. The majority, however, had some vague ideas, some input from parents, and some without any preconceived academic or career plans. The university had a small selection of prerequisite courses, but each term allowed the student to choose one or two electives. Often, I would be asked, "What do you think I should take?" My role was not to answer that question. First, I would ask which courses held their attention and why. It was my role to initiate a conversation about their ideas, visions of themselves, external pressures they may be resisting and why, and how they viewed undergraduate, graduate and professional education in their own ambitions and sense of selves. Most students planning to go on to an MBA program wanted to work for a few years right out of college and before applying for graduate school. One theme that has impressed me most among undergraduates in recent years is their desire to pursue humanitarian enrichment, climate adaptability and change and improving the available resources for ecologically efficient power generation. Sometimes it would seem less than obvious why a communications major would take a history course or biology. Chemistry was always a hard sell, yet so many careers call upon knowing basic natural sciences just to understand situational or life context. My personal bias for an undergraduate education is that a generalist approach will serve one best for a bachelor's degree. Those four years should expose the student to areas of study and new ideas from which one can evaluate future study or employment opportunities. For students planning careers in technical disciplines, who like and who excel in mathematics and the hard sciences, I think we as a society should encourage the return of the institutes of higher learning in science, engineering, communication science, rather than force every institution of higher learning to offer strong curricula in every possible field of study. I also believe that high school education should include a vocational education track as well as a college prep track. As it is, the community colleges have become the institutions that teach the trades. If employers could hire high school graduates that have the basic trade skills, employers could train their employees and sponsor community college courses for more specific skills. Finally, returning veterans often find that their skills are not transferable when applying for civilian jobs and are seen as lacking equivalent preparation for clinical or other licensed professions. For a trained combat medic to have to start back at beginning level courses is demoralizing and a waste of a highly skilled potential employee. Veterans with sophisticated skills in communications, distribution systems, community organizing or safety inspection skills are available today. They are being prevented, however, from being considered as qualified, experienced job candidates because of state license boards, union advancement rules, or employers' lack of vision. In the military, one needs education, demonstrated skill levels and personal organization to advance in grade. Employers with job vacancies who do not access this skilled labor pool overlook sources of innovation in process and product.

Posted by: Pano Kroko • June 26, 2011

The current void of leadership in Greece makes it difficult to guide the people out of the dessert. Please read this post: Leaderless Greece: http://wp.me/pcacD-15n

Posted by: Pano Kroko • June 26, 2011

Dear Mindy, Thank You for your insightful post and all your good words in service of a Greek renaissance. For a complete review of the European energy exchange plan and the Greek Fire Fund, here is the announcement: http://panokroko.wordpress.com/2011/06/14/greek-fire/ All eager and helpful participants are welcome because it takes all of our goodwill and strength to shift this rudderless boat. Thank You

Posted by: Roy Martens • August 17, 2011

You might also take the weak dollar into consideration, it might actually be cheaper to shoot in the US than in � land!

Posted by: Ka Wai Ho • August 17, 2011

Absolutely. Although, with tight credit conditions in both regions, I'd be interested to see whether there are areas in the world where film financing (rather than tax credits) are more readily available which makes them more attractive to film producers...

Posted by: Bruce Pierce • September 09, 2011

Conrad do you believe that this economic is structural and global in nature? Also, can you see the argument that through innovation many jobs have been eliminated and will not return. Therefore, the ability to "create" at least 8 million new opportunties reducing the unemployment figures by half is unrealistic?

Posted by: ALbert Kaplan • September 16, 2011

It's technology leverage- Politicians and many Economists fail to correctly evaluate the impact of improved and growing use of technology on the Job Market. The proof of the pudding, most of the Dow Jones 30 have increased revenue in the past three years and have reported higher profits (the only exception are major banks which reported lower profits DUE TO MORTGAGE writeoffs. In response to item 3 of your summary, seriously doubt if funds are returned via Tax Holiday, they will be used for employment, higher probability, purchase more hardware produced in China and Software from India. We need to be realistic and plan on high unemployment until we make major changes in education and change the Tax System to reduce the growing disparity in distribution of wealth. Trust you recall, one of the major talking points in the passage of the Bush Tax Reforms was "It would create Jobs".

Posted by: Barbara Duck • March 07, 2012

Posted by: Robert Boucher • March 30, 2012

Posted by: Lili Dove • April 26, 2012

Posted by: Lili Dove • May 03, 2012

Posted by: Narain Bhatia • May 03, 2012

Posted by: Jason Hirschman • June 05, 2012

Posted by: Caroline Walker • June 16, 2012

Posted by: Brady Westwater • June 25, 2012

Posted by: Barbara Duck • September 13, 2012

Agree the process is antiquated like many other processes but due to complexities in software and al

Posted by: Douglas Wilson • September 13, 2012

Compared to the iterative and often duplicative processes that go into software and consumer electronics products (not to diminish the significant effort involved in designing the iPhone, a revolutionary product), it's easy to see how patents could in fact slow rather than encourage innovation. We've seen what's been colloquially termed a "patent war" over the last decade. The large technology firms have been patenting every idea they can think of (Forbes recently made note of a five dimensional touch interface patent Apple was granted; this idea has not been utilized in a product and may never be).

Posted by: Douglas Wilson • September 13, 2012

Samsung's defense said, "Rather than compete in the marketplace, Apple is seeking a competitive edge through the courtroom," and "if you go Apple's way, you could change the way competition works in this country. Is this country going to have vigorous competition between competitors? Or giant conglomerates with thousands of patents that block competitors?" Both sides are right. The current patent system was not designed for the type of invention and iteration that occurs in today's technology sector. It proved very capable at handling products created in the pharmaceutical or biotech industries. These industries have been responsible for significant economic and job growth. But there are fundamental differences between products created in the biotech/pharmaceutical and consumer electronics industries. (Software patents are a uniquely complicated issue).

Posted by: Douglas Wilson • September 13, 2012

We've seen what's been colloquially termed a "patent war" over the last decade. The large technology firms have been patenting every idea they can think of (Forbes recently made note of a five dimensional touch interface patent Apple was granted; this idea has not been utilized in a product and may never be). Samsung and Apple have catalogues with thousands of patents each. When firms such as Nortel fail, bidding wars ensue over their newly available and highly valuable patents. Even more frustrating are the companies known as "patent trolls": firms whose sole purpose is to sue others based on patents they own but have no intention to utilize. While large companies such as Apple, Samsung, Google or Microsoft can easily pay the required legal fees to combat this, smaller firms are not as capable (a recent Slate article documents this).

Posted by: Douglas Wilson • September 13, 2012

In an age where tech products create fierce company loyalty, many consumers will judge this case based on previous devotion. But this isn't about choosing sides -- the current patent system is simply not as relevant as it once was. The USPTO is no longer capable of reviewing and fairly awarding patents in this industry. There needs to be change: the USPTO must develop a system that can respond quickly and that has a technologically sophisticated understanding of the nuances of the products and issues at stake. Not a simple task, but necessary to ensure continued efficiency and growth in one of the world's most productive sectors -- and one whose viability demands protecting and rewarding innovation from firms big and small.