1970's Oil Shock

Noah Smith has a piece in Bloomberg, describing the 1970's rise in oil prices and attributing several structural changes in the economy to that cause.   This shows gas prices over the last 100 years.  In 1968 when I first began driving as a civilian prices were $.34 a gallon.  Sometimes you had gas price wars, which would drive the prices even lower. Stations might offer premiums, like steak knives, for filling a tank. (Back in the day, banks used to offer premiums to open savings accounts, since interest rates were capped--but that's another subject.) We're still using a couple knives I got back then.

By 1980 the prices had risen to $1.19--tripling in price. That's after embargoes and long gas lines as people panicked (rather like the toilet paper shortages this spring). 

Evaluation of MFP

 NYTimes has a piece tied to GAO's assessment of MFP in a report Monday.  The criticisms seem to focus on higher payments for Southern producers and for big producers.  

I'd note that the WTO just issued an opinion that Trump's tariffs on China were illegal. MFP was intended to counter the adverse effects of the Chinese tariffs which responded to Trump's tariffs.

Will I Accept a Trump Victory?

 There's some worrying that liberals would not accept another Trump victory.  I can only speak for myself, a diehard Democrat.

If a "Trump victory" means an outcome like 2016--a loss in the popular vote but a clear plurality in one or more states sufficient to mean an electoral college victory--yes, I'll "accept" it.  By which I mean I'll recognize him as the person elected to be president according to our constitution. It doesn't mean I won't be as active, or more active, in opposition as I have been.

If the election goes to Congress, I'm not giving a promise of acceptance, although to the extent I understand the 1876 resolution I'd likely acceptance such an outcome in 2020.

The Last Mile Problem for US Government

 I've used the idea of a "last mile" problem before, but didn't really describe it.  The "last mile" in the internet is linking a home to the internet.  It's relatively easy to run fiber cable around the land.  It's like our blood--the veins and arteries are easy, but the capillaries are where it gets complicated.  In my mind the American federal government has such a problem--it can't connect reliably with all its citizens in all aspects of society.

I just noticed another instance: Treasury Department has 9 million checks it hasn't gotten to citizens.

The problem is more than 9 million--these are people who are part of the economy--IRS knows who they are, as opposed to people who are "off the grid" entitely.

Gates on Foreign Policy

 Reading Robert Gates: Exercise of Power, American Failures, Success, and a New Path Forward in the Post-Cold War World.

This Post review is pretty good.  Gates applauds Nixon and Reagan as having foreign policy agendas on entering office, and working effectively to implement them. He likes George HW Bush's response to the end of the Cold War, but criticizes Carter, Clinton, Obama, and Trump. He offers overviews of our history in dealing with various foreign affairs issues over the last 50 years, during much of which he was either at CIA, NSC, or DOD. Then he offers suggestions for better management.

His three big things are:

•  reviving, in my eyes, the Weinberger/Powell criteria for military engagement
• arguing for building up our non-military instruments of foreign policy--State, foreign aid, sanctions,education, etc.
• arguing for coordinated use of foreign policy instruments--he cites GWBush's Pepfar (aid to Africa for AIDS) as a model.

Two thoughts in response:

• for any organization there's a trade-off between specialization and coordination of effort. We had that in USDA, still do, and I don't think anyone has really solved the problem.  The National Security Council was supposed to be the solution originally, but Gates doesn't think much of  its modern incartnation.
• Gates in a sense is arguing for "defunding the military" as progressives are arguing for "defunding the police." In both cases the analysis is that using force is counter-productive and/or ineffective, and using available alternatives to force would work better. (This is my take, definitely not his.)

Just a note from history--in the1950's the UN was the hope of the left.  While Gates doesn't ignore the UN, it's obvious from his discussion how far its stature has fallen.

Ethnic Tensions

 Watched the older Ben Affleck movie, "The Town", last night.  A few subtle reminders of the group/ethnic tensions which were once a big feature of Boston life.  

Tribalism is everywhere humans are.  

9/11 is a good day to remember that. 

Sad Words on Records Management

 Federal Computer Week has a long discussion of the challenges records management faces in the current environment:“I love my records management staff,” one said. “They’re fantastic. But they are not database people. They are not technologists.”

I think the bottom line is that "records management" is not a sexy occupation, which means it can descend into a vicious circle: because it's not sexy it doesn't attract the best employees or employees who have experience in new processes and technology, management can ignore it for more crucial issues, employees can ignore records management problems and fail to understand the logic of the rules, and records management issues are ignored in developing new systems. Back in the day, my early days at ASCS, our business processes were pretty much standard across the country: electric typewriters and carbon paper, and information moved on mail carts and clearance folders.  No more.

That explains both Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server as well as various figures in the White House under the current administration.

The Lessons of Fairfax Scools

 As I understand it, the Fairfax school system had problems with remote learning back in the spring for two reasons--using older software (Blackboard, I believe) and running it on their own server instead of in the cloud.  The outcome was initially a fiasco, as the system couldn't handle the big load.

This problem, and my experience, suggests that the educators advising the Fairfax County School Board weren't paying enough attention to their infrastructure, likely because they regarded it as a distraction from the real job of educating students and running the system. 

As I used to say: "maintenance has no sex appeal".

Vertical Farming's Unnoted Advantage?

I'm guessing maybe vertical farming has an advantage I've not considered in the past.  I've mostly been skeptical of it and still am.  But...

One of the problems of growing produce is labor.  While farm labor isn't well paid, the harvesting of vegetables typically requires hand labor, which I think usually turns into seasonal labor (depending on the crop).  But I saw the other day a picture of a worker in a vertical farm growing lettuce.  He was wearing a white uniform, and standing by a tray of lettuce at shoulder height. I don't know whether it's standard for vertical farms to have their growing trays on a rotating drive arrangement, so that the work is always at eye level, but it makes sense they would.  It's a slight additional expense and a complication for maintenance but still.

So consider the labor advantages of such a system:

• no back-breaking labor, no bad weather of heat or rain, etc., clean.
• the job is not seasonal, it's year round, meaning the workers can be permanent.
• while the vertical farming factory is located in or near a city, with its higher living costs, the much bigger labor pool and the much better working conditions might well counterbalance the costs.

Just some guesses, but I'll be interested to see if I'm right or wrong.

Time for Higher Real Estate Tax Rates

 Megan McArdle and this Post analysis both describe a booming real estate market in the suburbs, as the "professional" (AKA "upper middle class") take advantage of cheap money and flee the crowded cities. I can see that in my own neighborhood: in the last year or so there have been several townhouses change hands in my cluster.  These would likely be entry-level houses, currently selling in the $350K range.  By the old standards of 2.5 times yearly income that means household income of $140K--not likely. A two income family would, I'd assume, come close to $90-100 K (say two school teachers)

IMO the country needs some way to counter such trends. We don't need McMansions, we don't need everyone having their own private bathroom, we don't need 2.4 rooms per person,  2,700 square feet in a house, much less more than that.  I write this knowing my wife and I occupy a house with 2 baths, 2 half baths.  But it's less than 1500 square feet.  I didn't need that big of a house when I bought; we don't use the whole house now.

When I bought I found the biggest house I thought I could afford because I figured it was a good investment. I assume that parents would buy the biggest house they can afford in the best school district they can find for similar reasons: their kids are good investments; their house is a good investment, or so they think.

The only current way of countering ever more investment in housing is real estate taxes.