Prognostications of the Future

Kagan and Kristol foresaw the future in a book published 10 years ago. Via Tom Ricks The Best Defense, here's a look back.

[Needless to say, they were about 95 percent wrong, and totally missed bin Laden.  But then, no good liberal would ever pay attention to any book which got the future right--what would be the fun in that.]

Where's the NAEP for Government?

 NAEP stands for National Assessment of Educational Progress.  It's a set of tests to see what students know and can do in different fields; thus, it's indirectly an assessment of schools, which is the way it's mostly used.

Assessing teachers is hard.  We've all had good teachers and bad teachers, and some of the teachers who were good for us maybe weren't so good for other students in the class.  And maybe some of what we learned wasn't really what our parents or the local community wanted us to learn, and thought they were paying the teachers to learn.

So is assessing government bureaucracy hard.  Compared to education, there's probably even more disagreement over the value of various programs.  The GPRA of 1993 was an initial attempt to try to assess performance. I'm dubious of its value, but now Sen. Lieberman and others are trying to revise and update it. I'm still dubious.  To make this real, there should be an administration strategic plan and a Congressional strategic plan. Obviously what Obama wants the EPA to do is different than what Sen. McConnell et. al. want the EPA to do.  If the EPA does a plan that's the lowest common denominator of the two, it won't say much.  But even then, if Obama and McConnell were paying attention to the strategic plan, that would be a big improvement.  I suspect the reality is neither will pay much attention to it, meaning it's mostly an exercise in bureaucratic paper creation and shuffling.

Government Is Good

That's the title of an interesting website, not a blog, of a professor at Mount Holyoke College.  He has a bunch of articles arguing various points.  

Another Dairy Farmer Goes Out

In central New York. Their numbers keep dwindling.

Mankiw and Taxes, My Touching Faith in the Professor

Greg Mankiw has a column in the NYTimes on his marginal tax rate, as it stands, and if the Bush tax cuts for the over $250K bracket aren't extended. He makes a fairly convincing case that increasing his marginal tax rate would decrease his incentive for added production.  Apparently, in his case, he'd be less apt to accept additional speaking engagements.

But I've some questions: when he's on the road speaking, what is it he's not doing?

• Presumably he's not at Harvard mentoring his graduate students or teaching his undergrads.  (Maybe he will have fewer guest lecturers in Econ 101 and more of the real Mankiw?) Maybe he cuts his office hours?
• Or maybe he's not doing economic research, writing the next great paper which is going to win him a Nobel prize?
• Or maybe he's not home with his family, investing in their social capital and his happiness? (Granted, none of the activities he's not doing would show up in the GDP, but Professor Mankiw is still a sentient human being and he's probably contributing to the good of the society wherever he is and whatever he's doing.

On a broader scale, assuming we need the money for the government, isn't the issue whether it's better to reduce the incentives for someone such as Professor Mankiw, or for the struggling graduate student or the assistant professor without tenure? To some extent it would seem increasing the rates on higher levels of income is age-biased; it is more likely to hit the older, better established person. I'd assume, just as the most jobs are created by start-up businesses, most ideas are created by the young. That would lead me to support increasing the rates on the high brackets, if that's the only choice I'm given.

The Great American Tradition: Hypocrisy

So thinks Kevin Drum, who argues everyone wants to cut government spending, except on the things they like.

I agree.

Externalities: Not Costs But Benefits

The economists define an externality as something which isn't captured in the price of the good or service. I usually notice externalities as costs: the pollution which is a by-product of the internal combustion engine, for example.  But there can also be benefits.  In the case of BT corn (corn genetically modified to produce a natural toxin which kills corn borers), farmers who buy and use BT corn seed benefit their neighbors who don't.  Turns out it's like vaccinations--vaccinate enough susceptible people in a group, and the unvaccinated benefit because the disease can't establish itself.

Cap Gemini and USDA

GSA gave Cap Gemini a 7-year blanket purchase agreement for services for USDA, including FSA's MIDAS.

Sometime 35 years ago or so, CAP Gemini did work for ASCS.  At that time the idea was to get a view of the critical data ASCS managers needed and give it to them timely.  My impression from a friend who was trying to get work achieved was that management said something like: "data, what data? WE don't need no stinking data. Go away and don't bother us."

FSA and Crop Insurance

I can't resist stealing this from Farm Policy:

" Risk Management Agency Administrator Bill Murphy is pushing wireless records, GPS mapping technologies and smarter business practices to adapt.
“Agent commissions ballooned 35 percent between 2005-2008, thanks in part to the run up in commodity prices and a national shift toward revenue insurance policies, Murphy says. But given the budget constraints in the next farm bill, ‘Congress is not going to stand for paying $4 billion a year in administrative and overhead expenses,’ he adds. ‘That’s twice what the Farm Service Agency (FSA) spends to administer its programs. They don’t want it to happen again.’
“Murphy stresses the FSA isn’t seeking to replace the private crop insurance delivery system, but he says ‘other people in government’ may look at it when farm bill discussions begin in earnest. ‘We need to show we’re efficient and we’re lean,’ he tells agents.”

One of the final bitter lessons of my career was driving my employees and KC programmers to try to deliver CAT insurance efficiently, only to find our best efforts were ignored.  What Mr. Murphy seems to be saying is a government bureaucracy is more efficient than private industry.  Imagine that!

(To be fair, "private crop insurance" isn't a real private industry, but I'll take any crumb of comfort I can find.)

Most Surprising Sentence Today

From a description of a visit to MIT (yes, that's Massachusetts Institute of Technology): "During the conversation, I asked the MBA students if they knew where the library was and received many blank stares