Miller and Smith--And the Course of History

The Times had a piece on changes in the most common last names, the hook being the fact that Latino last names are moving up.

What caught my eye, though, were two of the other most common names: "Smith" and "Miller".  (Jones and Williams and Johnson were also big).  Why?  They're occupational names. Back in the day when surnames first were assigned, the predominant occupation was farming, but we don't see "Farmer" as a big surname.  Miller and smith would be higher income occupations back in the 16th century.  It appears that higher income people had more surviving offspring then, and in the future.

On a related issue Megan McArdle has a piece on the inheritance of status, giving a brief summary of some work tending to show that socioeconomic status is very inheritable. 

NIHism in Government

FCW has advice to high ranking career civil servants who have to adjust to their new bosses in the Trump administration.  All good, but this recognizes the NIHism common in government.

" Don't let arrogance or intransigence alienate you from the incoming leadership team. It's crucial to focus on outcomes and not be wed to the name of an initiative or its current process. Change happens. President George W. Bush's administration had a number of shared services initiatives branded as "eGov initiatives" and "lines of business." Those named initiatives were set aside by the Obama administration and time was lost before a new wave of shared services efforts were launched. This is a normal occurrence. Be prepared for it and keep the goal in mind -- the outcome matters much more than the form or structure of a current program."

As I've written before, the Madigan "Infoshare" (GHWBush's USDA secretary) initiative limped into the Espy USDA tenure, lost momentum, then was sort of revived under Glickman, but changed/killed under the GWBush administration.  The problem is that special projects represent a way for the administration to make a difference, to put their own stamp on the agency.  But because they're identified with one administration, unless they're completed within the term of the administration, it makes them particularly vulnerable as targets for the next.   By contrast the daily work of the bureaucracy is more immune to change. 

Two-fer for USDA Secretary?

Chris Clayton discusses possible picks for Secretary, including a Hispanic woman from Texas with previous USDA experience.

USDA is vitally important to Trump--he's devoted one transition team member to the entire department!!!

Contra Trump

I think our new president will be a transactional one.  Mr. Trump seems to have few fixed principles or beliefs, so he's likely to be very flexible in approaching issues.

I also think this flexibility and his lack of government experience (along with that of his appointees) is sure to lead to fiascoes and scandals, as well as significant changes and accomplishments.  (See Cowen's  post on the latter.)

With that assumption, I don't agree with those who believe Democrats should be unfailingly confrontational, following the pattern of Republicans with Obama but going one better. I'd suggest a two-pronged stance:

• take every opportunity to point out Trump's lack of principles and flip flops--he'll provide sufficient ammunition.
• do deals when possible.  Given past partisanship such deals are likely to split Republicans.

So in 2020  our candidate should run against Trump based on a set of principles and a set of deals.

 My underlying assumption is that the deals Dems reach with Trump will be successful, at least as contrasted to the issues on which we attack.

A Puzzle: Increasing Education and No Mobility

In recent days some seemingly solid articles/posts have reported the following:

• over the past 40-50 years the average American has gotten more education (i.e., more people graduating high school, more people going to college, more people graduating college, etc.)
• over the past 40-50 years the added income attributable to education, the education "premium", has increased.
• over the past 40-50 years the earnings of the average American is no greater than his/her parents.

My knee-jerk reaction is that if the first two are right, the third can't be right.   There must be something else which I'm missing.

Originalism on the Electoral College

Electoral college voting today.  Some, mostly Democrats, now believe in originalism as it pertains to the college--should be a set of independent judges exercising their judgment.  Others, notably Republicans, now believe the college should vote according to the norms and precedents in history, disregarding the original intent. 

A New Front for Animal Rights--Voluntary Milking?

Modern Farmer has a post describing the voluntary milking robot systems being installed on big dairy farms.

DeLaval has a set of photos -- sure don't look like dairy barn I grew up with. 

If I understand "voluntary" means a cow can walk into the robot and be milked whenever she wants.  While I've always believed dairies generally took good care of their cows, the voluntary aspect is something entirely new.  There would seem to a tension between the food movement, which likely disapproves of the size a dairy needs to be to justify such a robot system, and the animal rights movement, which should see a gain to animal welfare from the voluntary milking.

American Factoids--Declining Scots-Irish

German Federal States are, on average, about 8,600 square miles. East German states are about 7,000, west German ones are about 9,600. US states are, on average, about 74,000 square miles, so far from comparable.

That's from Lyman Stone also these:

Do you know what major American ancestry-group is declining faster than any other? Scotch-Irish. The vaunted origin-ancestry of Appalachia lost nearly 2.2 million self-identifiers from the 2009 ACS sample to the 2014 ACS sample, marking a 42% decline. The only ancestries to lose more people were German and English; much of the decline in those two groups was centered around Appalachia.

Want to guess the fastest-growing ancestry group in America? I bet you guessed “Mexican” or “Chinese.” Those are solid guesses; Mexican is #3, at 11% growth with 2.4 million new self-identifiers.

The correct answer, however, is “White/Caucasian.” The number of Americans self-identifying not as English or German or Scotch-Irish but “White” as their ancestry, as distinct from just their race, rose 47% from the 2009 ACS to the 2014 ACS, with 3.9 million new identifiers. The second largest grower was “American” as an ancestry; this is un-hyphenated American, mind you. There are 2.9 million new “Americans,” giving 15% growth.

"LIfe After Cows"

Unlike crop farming, dairy farms can come to a sudden and abrupt end. I know.

Two kids can set a fire, the barn goes, and the herd has to be sold.  (Averaging 27,000 lb per cow--that's a figure unheard of in the 1950's.)

Or advancing age, low prices, a smaller dairy, no successors can make for a more gradual sell-off, as here.

Or a TB test comes out positive, and the bureaucrats order a "depopulation".  (Some great photos at this site, prairie Canada.

Or, as happened with my dad, there's a severe stroke, so the cows went the next day, a phrase I can't type without emotion, even though I never wanted to farm.

The Dream of Online Access to USDA Operations

In 1992 we had the dream of permitting farmers online access to ASCS, SCS, Farmers Home applications.  In the initial Infoshare pilot we found very limited adoption.  As I've observed from a distance the different embodiments of that dream over the years, I've always been curious how many farmers were really getting online and making use of the capabilities USDA provided. But despite my suggestions over the years, I'm not aware of any Federal site which publishes usage figures, so there's no way for a member of the public to see whether progress is being made.

Recently I found a clue, at least for FSA/NRCS/RD, thanks to the requirement for public notice on data requirements.  (The first time in my life I've really seen a value for that procedural requirement.)

Here is the Federal Register document from USDA on the information collection requirement for e-Auth.

"The USDA eAuthentication Service provides public and government businesses single sign-on capability for USDA applications, management of user credentials, and verification of identify, authorization, and electronic signatures. USDA eAuthentication obtains customer information through an electronic self-registration process provided through the eAuthentication Web site. The voluntary online self-registration process applies to USDA Agency customers, as well as employees who request access to protected USDA web applications and services via the Internet. Users can register directly from the eAuthentication Web site located at www.eauth.egov.usda.gov. The information collected through the online self-registration process will be used to provide an eAuthentication account that will enable the electronic authentication of users. The users will then have access to authorized resources without needing to reauthenticate within the context of a single Internet session."

 "Description of Respondents: Farms; Individuals or Households; Business or other for-profit; Not-for-profit institutions; Federal government; State, Local or Tribal Government.
Number of Respondents: 114,256.

 There's no breakdown given for how many of the respondents are actually farmers.  My guess would be about 80,000 to 100,000, which might be from 10 to 25 percent of potential users.