Friday, April 29, 2011

A Fiscally Conservative Approach to the Debt Limit

Keith Hennessey explains the most logically consistent approach I’ve seen to the USA’s federal debt limit for fiscal conservatives at the National Review:

A parent gives his irresponsible child a credit card. That child maxes out the card by paying only the first month’s installment of an incredibly expensive annual subscription.

The parent confiscates the credit card to prevent new irresponsible spending. He must still, however, pay the existing credit-card debt. He must also honor the remainder of the contract his child has signed, even if doing so means he must incur more credit-card debt and ask for an increase in his credit-card limit. Unless he is willing to risk bankruptcy or a lawsuit, he must honor the financial obligations his family member incurred.

The parent has control only over new spending commitments, and he must now severely cut back on those. He places his child on a strict allowance and cuts spending throughout the family budget.

Congress must raise the debt limit. Not doing so would eventually lead to defaulting on Treasury bonds, a potentially catastrophic event. Along with that debt limit, Congress should impose a statutory cap on all non-interest spending.

The president and his allies will demand a clean bill or weaker reforms. Republicans should allow them to try to pass such a bill. They should vote no but not filibuster. When it becomes clear that such a bill lacks even the simple majority needed to pass the House and the Senate, Republicans will have a stronger hand in negotiations.

— Keith Hennessey has served as senior White House economic adviser and deputy director of the National Economic Council. He is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution and blogs at KeithHennessey.com.

Of course a government often has the option that many families do not (at least in the short term). A government can increase it’s income by raising taxes. But there is a limit to maximum tax revenue that can be collected over any period of time. It is also likely more efficient to limit tax revenues below that maximum limit. So Hennessey’s argument is also valid for anyone less concerned about the federal budget’s size and the national debt and projected deficits.

Posted via email from Glodime @ Posterous

Friday, April 22, 2011

Learning is Not Just Memorizing

One particular part of a story about the teaching experience of a graduate student in math at Dartmouth College in the fall of 1996 resonated with me. It articulated something that I had only an intuitive but often a skeptical understanding of; when you learn something as opposed to simply memorizing a pattern or algorithm, you don’t need to study it again to remember what you learned.

Teaching linear Algebra:

…I was lucky enough to talk to some of my students about the experience a few months later. The general consensus was that the material really stuck. Furthermore nobody studied for the final. No joke. As one girl said, “I tried studying because I thought I should, but I gave up after a half-hour because I already knew it all.” That is how I think it should be – if you study properly through the course, then you won’t need to study for the final. Because you’ve already learned it. And you’ll have a leg up on the next course because you still remember the material that everyone else has forgotten.

Sometimes, even a decade after I’ve last thought about an obscure topic, I’ll recall everything I’ve read about it including arcane details and problems I’ve work out and the reasoning that brought me to conclusions.

Posted via email from Glodime @ Posterous

Friday, April 8, 2011

Unmediated Information

Canadian Economist, Frances Woolley sketched a diagram to estimate the possible value of unmediated information from economists to the general public. That is, why reading an explanation of economic analysis from an Economist is better than reading a journalist’s explanation.

I honestly think that most journalists wouldn’t know what this diagram means. Would they realize that Woolley’s diagram indicates that the average college graduate understands more about economics than an average journalist? (I don’t think so.) Is that a good assumption by Woolley? (I think so.) What does that say about business and economics journalist that are not Economists? (There are probably a lot of bad ones.) What does this imply about economic reports in popular media? (It is probably under reported and often poorly explained or incorrect.)

Posted via email from Glodime @ Posterous

Unmediated Information

Canadian Economist, Frances Woolley sketched a diagram to estimate the possible value of unmediated information from economists to the general public. That is, why reading an explanation of economic analysis from an Economist is better than reading a journalist’s explanation.

http://worthwhile.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451688169e20147e3d50aef970b-pi

I honestly think that most journalists wouldn’t know what this diagram means. Would they realize that Woolley’s diagram indicates that the average college graduate understands more about economics than an average journalist? (I don’t think so.) Is that a good assumption by Woolley? (I think so.) What does that say about business and economics journalist that are not Economists? (There are probably a lot of bad ones.) What does this imply about economic reports in popular media? (It is probably under reported and often poorly explained or incorrect.)

Posted via email from Glodime @ Posterous

Friday, April 1, 2011

 
Creative Commons License
Glodime Thought Nuggets authored by Eric Morey is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.