« The really supreme Supreme Court (updated 27jun15) | Main | The Tangled Threads of Our Times »

25 June 2015

Comments

Don Bessee

Scratch, sniff, sniff, ahhhh clean kitty litter. So the other big SCOTUS decision today on housing is going to have long term implications that are being lost in the 0/scotus care decision. So now my friends they are free to force section 8 housing into middle, upper-middle and upper cost neighborhoods. This with literally no consideration of the financial impacts on the home owners. IF this is implemented like the language in 0's housing suits it will amount to a taking from everyone in the neighborhood and those in closer proximity to a greater extent without compensation. Realtor says- Sure its a beauty for 1.5m on the golf course but there is a section 8, 20 unit across the street with no off street parking. Hey, I gotta disclose, its the law.

Account Deleted

Ah, yes - the 'disparate impact' rule. I'd like to know why this doesn't apply to Govt Motors. They sell some cars that most of the 'African American Community' can't afford. This is obvious racism. Why aren't a certain % of Cadillacs set aside in order to have the Cadillac buyers reflect a proper amount of 'diversity'?
You think I'm kidding? I just applied the exact logic that is now in force with other stuff we buy.
Let the crickets sing!

George Rebane

Regarding the notion of ‘externalities’ as they relate to Gross National Income. Externalities are cited (usually by the Left) as something that is formalized beyond debate in accounting circles. In my readings on the topic I have not found that to be true. I would like to have someone give me a citation that resolves the matter so I can expand my GDP defining flowchart (shown above) to include GNI, and unambiguously communicate the relationship showing how the code and regulatory compliance costs figure into the whole equation. Until you write the equation, and/or draw the computational flow, you have only bullshit to back your arguments about how compliance costs with absorbed externalities are accounted. Can anyone help?

Todd Juvinall

GeorgeR, I think the people who say they know all about economics and are proven correct are non existent. All the numbers and all the forecasts are really a crock. Too many variables, just like "global warming" computer models. The government is in every single thing that is produced in our economy. From the mining to the growing to all the things needed to do anything. That cost is huge. It must be at least half. I get a kick out of the economists who, when something happens say, "economists were surpriesed..." They never get it right!

One need only look at the "airbag" fiasco. Billions will be spent in all this and the cause? Eight people were allegedly killed when an airbag inflated for some reason. The cost benefit means nothing as long as the liberal can make someone else pay the bills and they can feel good about themselves. The Steve Frisch copy/paste fest here was a good indicator that he knows diddly squat about economics.

Steven Frisch

I love the conservatarian cartoon of GDP above. Must be nice to be able to just make shit up and pretend it is real based on your own view of the world.

I provided the definition of GNI George, and noted the real cost of regulation is included in the overall measurement of all economic activity in the economy, because if regulation has a real cost in hiring lawyers, increased construction cost, complying, or correcting issues identified, etc. it is captured. Perceived costs are as you said etherial externalities.

I never cited externalities nor stated they should be included, I responded to someone else citing externalities (the 'cost' of regulation) and stated that if they are counted, all externalities had to be counted.

Seriously Don, the court decision simply upheld an existing fair housing law that has been in place for 45 years. If there are no brown people living across the street from your friggin golf course already they probably won't be there in multi-family housing any time soon.

Ben Emery

Lets get this out of the way first.

Print $ = money from nothing

Here is a blog post on negative externalities presented in a way you might appreciate.
http://www.env-econ.net/negative-externality.html

fish

Lets get this out of the way first.

Print $ = money from nothing

...and getting that out there first does or explains..... what?

fish

Posted by: Steven Frisch | 25 June 2015 at 07:45 PM

Can you point me to that post Fish since clearly you are following it...and I mean the whole post not an edited version.

From the 19 June 2015 - Caudaphobia - The Tragedy of the Tails thread

Posted by: Gregory | 20 June 2015 at 01:17 PM

Of course I would not 'trash the world's economy' I would grow it..exponentially.

Posted by: steve frisch | 20 June 2015 at 02:15 PM


Todd Juvinall

Fish as you can see Steveie is just a blowhard and if he cannot find it to copy/paste from Wiki he is clueless. He never intended to explain how he would grow the econmy exponentially. In truth, his business model sucks dollars from the economy and robs the "commons" of taxes in a number of different ways.

Lastly, he has no people of color in his employ apparently yet comes here to tell us all how "racist" we are. He is just the Truckee Troll. What a hoot!

Steven Frisch

Posted by: fish | 26 June 2015 at 04:28 AM

Ah, I see what you are referring to Fish. I would probably walk that back slightly and not use the word 'exponentially' if I were not caught up in the passion of countering Greg's claim that I supported, "trash[ing] the world's economy."

But I am on record here strongly supporting capitalism (which i think my friend Ben would back me up on) and for a combination of heavy investment in infrastructure, education (including STEM which George supports and would likely back me up on if not HOW we support eduction), investment in research and development of new products and services, trade liberalization (with stronger environmental and labor standards), regulatory reform including sunsetting regulations and benchmarking them against desired outcomes, and a regulated market economy which would create amore stable platform for economic growth. You may disagree with some of those things, but I sincerely believe that they would grow the economy and spread benefit to a broader range of stakeholders.

Steven Frisch

Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 26 June 2015 at 06:13 AM

Todd, only an idiot like you would consider sourcing information a bad thing.

Todd Juvinall

Steve Frisch, you are too funny. Copy/paste king of the blogs. No mind of his own. And you call me names. What a hoot!

fish

Posted by: Steven Frisch | 26 June 2015 at 06:25 AM


Darn the luck....I thought we were going to hear about something more substantial.

fish

Can't buy historical games about the Civil war from the App store anymore....


Guess I'll have to salve my racist soul with this!


http://www.amazon.com/hitler-Funny-Hashtag-Ceramic-Coffee/dp/B00TDBCI8Y/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1435326965&sr=8-1&keywords=%23hitler+coffee+cup

Steven Frisch

Posted by: fish | 26 June 2015 at 06:30 AM

Yeah well I am just conforming to the culture of the blog where substance is never rewarded with thought and trite comment is heralded as wisdom.

fish

Posted by: Steven Frisch | 26 June 2015 at 06:44 AM

....and you do it magnificently.

George Rebane

SteveF 340am - are you disputing the correctness of my GDP "cartoon"?

fish

Damn....without the mob you progressives would truly be neutered!

A cop can shoot a guy under the sketchiest of circumstances and the state will protect him/her with every ounce of determination it can muster.

But commit a real crime.....a thoughtcrime like this arch fiend did and you're in a soupline.


http://atlanta.cbslocal.com/2015/06/25/charleston-officer-fired-after-posting-confederate-flag-photo-on-facebook/

Steven Frisch

Posted by: George Rebane | 26 June 2015 at 06:50 AM

No I am disputing the contention that no ones given you a rationale for how regulatory compliance fits into GDP. Costs associated with compliance are economic activities, thus they are in GDP. Perceived costs or lost opportunity are not economic activities thus they are not in GDP. They are externalities.

Todd Juvinall

Here I'll help Steve Frisch, I went and did a Frisch copy/paste on the word externalities. His favorite copy/paste location Wiki.

"In economics, an externality is the cost or benefit that affects a party who did not choose to incur that cost or benefit."

Now Stevie, use your noggin and tell us where that definition fits into GDP, GNI, BOLO etc., so all us dummies can hold you in awe. I know you can do it, your mouse is itching.

Todd Juvinall

Fish 6:57 AM link

Yes, America can and does lose its way when all the usual suspects from the left jump on board the bandwagon of "outrage". Let no one get in the way or you will be run over. The sale of pitchforks to the liberals is at an all time high. Hillary has the biggest one to ward of the little people she so dissed while First Lady of Arkansas during the celebration of the Confederate Flag day there. You just can't make this stuff up.

Steven Frisch

Todd if you could read for comprehension you would see I have already answered your question.

Steven Frisch

Oh man, I am going to love sitting back and watching the heads explode here over the SCOTUS decision on gay marriage.

fish

Posted by: Steven Frisch | 26 June 2015 at 07:25 AM


Why? Gay marriage generally isn't a topic that sets this blog aflame.


Is there something you want to tell us Steve?


Steven Frisch

Let's not forget where all this talk of GINI. GDP, externalities and inaccuracy started....it started with Greg's wild asses guess that "...the Feds spend half the national income...." which is clearly full of crap.

fish

Posted by: Steven Frisch | 26 June 2015 at 07:32 AM

Sorry....forgot you're the only one permitted hyperbole!

Our bad!

fish

Now this is funny...... today John Roberts takes an interest in the law.


JOHN ROBERTS DISSENT ON GAY RULING:

'Celebrate availability of new benefits. But do not Celebrate Constitution. It had nothing to do with it'...


What is this Constitution of which you speak?

Todd Juvinall

People want to marry pets, other same sex people, a log, hey have at it. Whatever makes you happy. Steve Frisch, do you have something you wish to tell us?

Todd Juvinall

Oh besides, the rumors that Kennedy may be a well, you know, wink wink, had nothing to do with the decision. LOL!

Steven Frisch

Yes Fish and Todd, your grade schools are calling, they want their investment in your future back.

fish

Posted by: Steven Frisch | 26 June 2015 at 07:56 AM


????

(Usually your snark is of better quality than this......you were up late last night though.....I'll chalk it up to fatigue.)

Jon

Great piece in the Times today. Love the possible Fox News motto.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/26/opinion/a-refuge-for-racists.html

Jon

Todd, much more likely it would be Alito with the wink, wink, wink.

George Rebane

SteveF 701am - I do have a different definition of externalities - "In economics, an externality is the cost or benefit that affects a party who did not choose to incur that cost or benefit." So to me and others of my ilk externalities are actually known dollar amounts that an agent experiences in his cash accounting. You have a different, more ephemeral definition - "Perceived costs or lost opportunity are not economic activities thus they are not in GDP. They are externalities." But I hope that we can now benefit from knowing each other's 'externalities' when we use the term.

But my real question is extracting regulatory compliance costs from GDP in a recognizable way that can be used to expand the above diagram. Such costs are directly measurable and thus suffered by agents/companies in a dollar and cents manner. They show up on two of a businesses main financial control reports - cashflow, sources & uses of cash. Their actual (out of pocket) dollar sums have been tallied by various organizations. When I was a manufacturer, it was easy for my CFO to do that accounting and report to me the number. It is that component in computing GNI that I haven't seen, and am looking for someone to point me to the equation. (I'm still on the prowl for it myself.)

fish


What's that sound......very faint......faint.......


Ah Tim Egan......blowing his dog whistle.......good thing you and Steve can hear his frequency.

Todd Juvinall

Steve Frisch 7:56 AM, is that the best you can come up with? Jeeze. Anyway, my education and hard work made it possible to put millions of free enterprise money through the system. The system gained hundreds of thousands in taxes from my efforts. I employed many people and from all walks of life and numerous racial and ethnic backgrounds.

You on the other hand according to you, bankrupted a business, got liened by local, state and federal tax agencies, took $250,000 of the employee withheld payroll taxes and spent it somewhere, and supposedly paid it off a few years ago. I think the system has been shortchanged by you not me. You are a tax taker Frisch, a leach on the systym and I know you are proud of it. What a hoot!

Todd Juvinall

Jon, Alito is totally hetro. There have been rumors of Kennedy from the days of his college years in Sacramento.

Steven Frisch

First, we are not defining the term differently, I agree with the definition you posted; my comment was specific to how you were using 'externality' and the predisposition here to count negative externalities but not count positive externalities. (we can just use air quality as a proxy).

Second, only on and I have actually posted to source material counting externalities from OMB and Reason (I suspect neither agreeing on the others figures). I guess if you wanted to include them in GNI you would go through the reason report, count up all the direct costs, and deduct them from the domestic economic activities component of GNI.

Steven Frisch

Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 26 June 2015 at 08:26 AM

Seriously Todd, you are 12.

Barry Pruett

Going to Pelline's blog for political commentary is like going to Riebe's for sushi. Pointless.

Steven Frisch

Posted by: Jeff Pelline | 26 June 2015 at 08:40 AM


Now that you mention it I known many more civilized 12 year olds.

Account Deleted

I'm surprised jon is still posting here after making a total ass of himself in his posts under the SCOTUS post by George.
from jon at 8:50 from the 'The Really Supreme' posts:
"Thanks Scott. But I know you would be willing to sacrifice that clean air if your net tax rate went up and cost you a few bucks. I know your MO. No worries, Idaho is going to be great for you. Very low minority and immigrant population as well."
jon has yet to provide any proof to back up that idiot claim about clean air and I have already given the reasons I'm moving to Idaho and those reasons have nothing to do with the racial make-up of the population. But then I was curious about the difference (if any) and did a quick Wiki check.
It turns out Canyon County ID, is 83.1% white and Nevada County CA is 93.4%!
Can't reply to the 'low immigration population' snark, since everyone is either an immigrant or descended from immigrants - I'm guessing he means illegal immigrants and I have no numbers on that. If there is less illegality in Idaho, does jon have a problem with that?

fish

Posted by: Barry Pruett | 26 June 2015 at 08:53 AM

Barry I'm shocked....it's a veritable intellectual roundtable going on over there among the various voices in jeffys head....and the occasional guest star.

George Rebane

StevenF 832am - not sure what positive externalities I have omitted from the accounting. If I understand your air quality proxy (for things like roads provided by government), then the amount of its cost/benefit as an externality would already be accounted for in the various taxes, tariffs, fees, ... paid by individuals and businesses to enable government to provide. In short, accounting wise it is a wash. Do you agree?

Todd Juvinall

Steve Frisch, what did I write about you above that was untrue?

Todd Juvinall

BarryP, you went to the Pelline blog? Shameful, LOL. But Frisch and all of Pelline's sock puppets at least are giving each other kudo's. You just can't make this stuff up.

Todd Juvinall

Externalities are not part of the total. It is like the left a few years ago telling us all that the YEW tree could not be harvested since it cured breast cancer or something like that. So how do you put a amount of that? You can't.

Government in our country is supposedly created and maintained by the consent of the governed, that's us. We are the government. Frisch and Elizabeth Warren don't know what they are talking about regarding "you didn't build that". All that was built was done woth the dollars from the consent of the governed.

Ben Emery

Ouch! You guys are having a tough week. But maybe you are celebrating the liberty and freedom same sex couples now will be able to enjoy.

Fish,
Print $ = money from nothing is significant since Print $ is what feeds the rest of Georges figure. We are borrowing money made from nothing to feed an economy and fund government debt.

Ben Emery

George,

You will have to go to the link for the graph.
http://www.env-econ.net/negative-externality.html
ECON 101: Negative Externality

Negative_externality_4 Consider the standard demand and supply diagram with pollution (click on the thumbnail to the right for a bigger image). An unregulated market leads to equilibrium price and quantity determined at the intersection of the supply, or marginal private cost (MPC), curve and the demand curve: P1, Q1.

Consumers and producers enjoy the gains from this equilibrium. The consumer surplus is the difference between willingness to pay (height of the demand curve) and price: area a + b + c + d. You enjoy consumer surplus every time you buy something and get a "good deal."

The producer surplus is the difference between the revenue earned on each unit (P1) and its marginal cost of production: area f + g + h (note that f includes the tiny triangle below P1 and above the MSC curve). Producer surplus is equivalent to profit without the fixed cost (e.g., monthly lease payments that don't change with output).

Unfortunately, production of Q generates some harmful side (i.e., external) effects such as fewer healthy days, fewer recreation opportunities, etc: marginal external cost = MEC. If these costs are constant then the full costs to society of production of Q is the marginal social cost curve: MSC = MPC + MEC. The external costs of Q1 are equal to area c + d + e + f + g + h. (Nothing in the conclusions changes if the MEC is increasing in Q0.

Environmental regulation is designed to get firms to "internalize the externality" by considering the external costs of production. If firms face a constant pollution tax on each unit of output so that they face production costs equivalent to the MSC curve then the new market equilibrium will be P2, Q2. The regulated product market will have a higher price and lower quantity.

At the new equilibrium, consumer surplus is area a and producer surplus is h. Government revenue is area b + c + f. The deadweight loss (DWL) of the tax is d + g (poof!). However, the avoided external cost is equal to d + e + g. Therefore, the net benefit of the environmental regulation is d + e + g - d - g = e > 0 (MEC - DWL). A benefit-cost analysis would indicate that the pollution tax is an efficient policy.

Now imagine that the environmental policy is command and control (and assume that abatement costs of command and control are the minimum abatement costs): firms are required to use a clean technology. In this case the producer surplus becomes area b and area c + f + h is simply the higher production costs associated with pollution abatement: the increased capital and labor devoted to pollution reduction.

Jobs are lost as output decreases from Q1 to Q2 but jobs are gained with activities associated with pollution control. If the pollution control activities are more labor intensive than production of the good, then jobs might be created as a result of environmental regulation. Yet, these jobs represent an additional cost of production and the benefit-cost analysis conclusion is as before. Counting abatement costs c + f + h as beneficial jobs without recognizing the offsetting loss of producer surplus (i.e., profit) to the polluting firm is to confuse costs and benefits.

Gregory

"Ah, I see what you are referring to Fish. I would probably walk that back slightly and not use the word 'exponentially' if I were not caught up in the passion of countering Greg's claim that I supported, "trash[ing] the world's economy." - Frisch, 6:25AM

What you keep calling for, a worldwide shift away from fossil fuels driven by political mandates, not economics, would trash the world's economy.

"Of course I would not 'trash the world's economy' I would grow it..exponentially." -Frisch

Must be nice to be able to just make shit up and pretend it is real based on your own view of the world.

Ben Emery

Fish,
I looked and couldn't find that SCOTUS changed the wording in the law. They interpreted words differently than you would like but that is the dice we roll when interpretation becomes part of the equation.

Actually the link Jeff Pelline gave gives a pretty good overview on the case and decision.
http://www.vox.com/2015/6/25/8845433/obamacare-king-v-burwell

Steven Frisch

Posted by: George Rebane | 26 June 2015 at 08:59 AM

I would agree George that counting externalities is extremely tricky business, and for the purposes of measuring national economic output probably needs to considered a wash, which is why I said if you count 'negative' you must count 'positive'.

However I must note that the OMB study I posted tracked hundreds of different federal regulations over a 10 year period and using a cost benefit analysis estimated positive externalities from regulation at anywhere from 4 to 10 times higher than negative externalities.

If we were to use the air quality example the question is "Are the avoided costs derived from air quality regulation greater than the direct and opportunity costs of regulation."

I am a proponent of gradually incorporating calculations like this into the design, supply chain, manufacture, marketing, use, and recycling of goods and services. Many people are experimenting with this approach and discovering that they can substantially reduce costs and improve profit by doing life cycle analysis. This approach has the added benefit of reducing the need for regulation....it attacks the negative externalities from regulation at the 'supply side' if you will.

I would argue that life cycle assessment is as important as risk assessment for a product or business. It illuminates areas where your supply chain is weak, where technology is disrupting the market, and where labor shortages occur , etc.

Here is an example of one application designed to analyze life cycle:

http://www.gabi-software.com/america/solutions/life-cycle-assessment/?gclid=CJ6yxcXircYCFQEcaQodbCUOCQ

http://www.gabi-software.com/america/solutions/life-cycle-assessment/?gclid=CKGomYbhrcYCFQEdaQodyZgI6g

Steven Frisch

Posted by: Gregory | 26 June 2015 at 09:15 AM


really no point even talking with you Greg. My contention, moving away from fossil fuels will be a net economic benefit. I could run the numbers but it would not change your mind.

George Rebane

BenE 911am - Thank you; let me puzzle on it. My initial perusal has lit some yellow lights on its interpretation of externalities. BTW, labeling it "Econ 101", implying that the presentation is beyond debate, is a bit of a reach.

Steven Frisch

Posted by: Ben Emery | 26 June 2015 at 09:08 AM

Boy they are having a bad week Ben. Obamacare, Fair Housing, Gay Marriage....if they lose on redistricting on Monday it will be a progressive sweep at the end of the session :)

Steven Frisch

Posted by: Gregory | 26 June 2015 at 09:15 AM


I will note however that the difference between you and me is that when I overstate something and get called on it, I review and admit my error if appropriate, as opposed to you who digs in your heels and resorts to 'wretchedly misnamed' rhetoric. One would think you were the one with a Rhetoric degree on your wall.

Gregory

I've not heard you admit the Sierra Business Council is, in fact, not a council of businesses, Steve. How was that name chosen?

Gregory

" My contention, moving away from fossil fuels will be a net economic benefit. I could run the numbers but it would not change your mind."

More to the point, no one with money to invest is betting their money on your fantasy without huge subsidies or other coersions from the politicians demanding it, and that includes the increasing amounts of 'renewable' energy delivered on the grid in California. AB32 was sold with the claim that the result would be the Golden State reinventing the modern economy, leading the world into the new world. Will Californians stand for paying more for energy than everyone else in the lower 48 ... if they weren't convinced they were saving the world?

BTW, you still have not actually coughed up a comment on the Met paper on the solar magnetic energy crash, the fastest drop of the last 9300 years. Sami Solanki, in precursor research a few years ago analyzed cosmogenic isotopes captured in tree rings, thus getting a year by year measurement going back about that 9000 years, and found the sun's field in the 20th century was at twice the average, an energy level equaled only about 10% of the time. The scientists you are trying really hard to ignore have made the case that solar magnetic energy resulted in fewer clouds through much of the 20th century, and the current crash means more clouds now and over the next few solar cycles.

Your raison d'etre is in a slo-mo collapse, Steve.

Todd Juvinall

When someone is a failure in every free enterprise endeavor they try, they are the last person anyone should go to for an opinion on economics. SBC and its CEO have no credibility in free enterprise but they do in "how to beg and receive non-profit money" .

Steven Frisch

Posted by: Gregory | 26 June 2015 at 09:46 AM


So why in the world would I drag my business into this forum? I post here as an individual, and my business life has nothing to do with anything here.

George Rebane

Administrivia - I invite your kind attention to the 26jun15 update to 'The really supreme Supreme Court' wherein liberals will find much to celebrate.

fish

Posted by: Ben Emery | 26 June 2015 at 09:16 AM

Whatever Ben....in this I'll take the word of Scalia...after all he was there unlike the sages at vox.com.

fish

Posted by: Jeff Pelline | 26 June 2015 at 10:25 AM

Spoken like a guy who used to fetch coffee for Herb Caen who now produces food porn in the foothills!

Gregory

You're a founder and current President and CEO of the Sierra Business Council, Steve. It has a misleading name.

Why?

George Rebane

SteveF 924am - Excellent, we are making progress. Yes, identifying and quantifying externalities is indeed a tricky business, as is cost accounting. Anyone who has done cost accounting for a larger enterprise (private or public) knows the brown numbers that have to be developed, often on the basis of how their validation will fly in the board room. Would that it were more objective.

In that sense I look forward to reporting my take on BenE's 911am hopeful explication of externalities. Are you familiar and/or agreeable with the presentation?

Gregory

As long as Jeff Pelline, award winning journalist and champion of the 97% climate consensus is back...

Jeff, just how do you justify the carbon footprint of that monster truck with the vanity license plates?

fish

Posted by: Steven Frisch | 26 June 2015 at 09:34 AM

How do you figure we're having a bad week. We've witnessed a Chief Justice of the supreme court twist himself into an obvious legal pretzel to justify poorly written law yesterday and offer a weak assed dissent on the gay marriage decision today.

You guys have to make this legislative abortion work and it is by no means out of the woods from a survival standpoint.

I may have to take Nancy Pelosi up on her offer to be a complete layabout and have the citizenry (you poor bastards) foot the bill for my medical care.

fish

Posted by: Jeff Pelline | 26 June 2015 at 10:49 AM

I misrepresent nothing jeffy. Although I'd guess you've engaged in a little memory holing I recall very vividly your fond remembrances of being Herbs coffee boy. And I freely admit to being a "regular guy" which makes it even more entertaining and ironic when I ridicule the likes of a guy like you! If you'd just been some run of the mill fat guy I'd have lost interest in under a week......but you're such a big fat sweaty train wreck of a.....and I use the following term only because right now I can't think of anything better...."human being" it's hard to look away.

fish

I think this is because you haven't accomplished, little if nothing, yourself so you belittle the experience of others?


First rate sentence structure as demonstrated by "The Nations Editor". That explains much about the overall poor state of todays newspapers.

George Rebane

Gentlemen - you are again contending with Pelline who has nothing but the deepest disdain for this forum and many of its participants. He allows none of this on his strictly "mediated" blog, yet there is where you should take your exchanges. His recent 1025am, 1049am, and 1114am have been removed. He has a standing invitation to join in the topical debates, and also no slack in throwing mudballs at this blog or its commenters. Capice?

Steven Frisch

Posted by: George Rebane | 26 June 2015 at 10:42 AM

I am familiar with Ben's explanation from Environmental Economics. I am generally in agreement with their explanation of a negative externality.

However I would add, as now stated ad infinitum, that production of Q in the EE example also generates some positive side effects unmeasured by market value, such as optionally cleaner air, more recreation opportunities, etc.

This is why life cycle analysis is so important--both negative and positive externalities have a tendency to be hidden because they do not have recognized market value--understanding them and seeking ways to create market value for them is a more efficient way to allocate resources, and thus grows the overall economy in the long run.

Steven Frisch

Posted by: George Rebane | 26 June 2015 at 11:11 AM

Why do Todd and Greg get slack throwing mud balls.

Jon

Steve, great question- one which I would like the host to answer.

Now for some entertainment- I present to you- highly vocal Abstinance Advocate and now 2 time Official Sinner, Ms. Bristol Palin. You go girl! A lady after Todd's Christian heart.

http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Bristol-Palin-says-she-s-pregnant-for-second-time-6350224.php

George Rebane

StevenF 1124am - With more than a considerable number of life cycle analyses under my belt, I don't recall that life cycle analysis removes any of the subjective factors that also infect cost accounting. In fact, depending on your selected time horizon (another brown number) for the life cycle, one must add in a whole new slew of brown numbers to get quantified results. Sam's life cycle costs are not Hank's, and neither are, say, DoD's the same as DHS's even though all are looking at the same system, equipment, process, law, regulation, ... . In short, where's the panacea?

George Rebane

StevenF 1130am - They don't throw mudballs at me or RR. Their disagreements with me, while at times vigorous, remain gentlemanly. And their ascerbicity (especially from Gregory) are still sufficiently churchillian so that I don't take offense. That is not the case when Pelline arrives on these pages. Many here, including me, have gone into more detail on the matter and there is no profit in rehashing, but suffice to say that Jeff Pelline is not a very nice man.

BTW, I do believe that both ToddJ and GregG are a bit quick on the trigger. For example, I would welcome Todd just posting a link here to his more complete vituperation expanded on his own blog. Something like 'xx is totally off base on yy, and I have set him straight on my blog (followed by the link)'. That would save these pages from the exchange, and drive more traffic to 'Sierra Dragon's Breath' which also features ToddJ's many essays on issues of the day.

Todd Juvinall

It is interesting to note that Red China, Frisch's favorite place apparently, is building a coal fired plant a week to generate electricity that allows them to make and assemble Iphones to ship to America and make Apple a trillion dollar company. I don't think the "externalities" are in our favor. I also don't recall a daily deluge of Frisch criticizing Red China's "air pollution" and its impact on their GNP. I mean, when 3 billion souls over there, (India too) are snubbing their noses at the EPA (LOL) how can we justify our own economic mastery of the planet?

fish

Posted by: Steven Frisch | 26 June 2015 at 11:30 AM

As I've stated here on numerous occasions I would be happy to throw my "mudballs" in Pellines catbox directly but he runs it as he sees fit. His box his rules.

George has graciously allowed me some latitude in his sandbox to lob some at "The Nations Editor" from a distance.

Todd Juvinall

My blog is unmoderated and all are welcome to come there as well. I have a lot of views. I am more than happy to see the libs come there but they just can't help themselves about personal attacks! They even researched my marriages! But, I like it here because GeorgeR posts items and ideas I like to discuss. Unfortunately, the libs come and attack and cause mudbaths. Jonnie is the latest and he is strictly a troll. George allows him to post and that is his right. Gregory and the rest here except the usual lib suspects just can't help themselves about namecalling.

fish

"jon" I'll see your Palins morality issues post with this......


Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-06-26/collapse-part-5-things-fall-apart

Gin up all the programs you want......they start out with sand in the gears!

Parts 1 -4 are worth perusing as well.

fish

Now this is the sort of thing that could scuttle my gals chances........


http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/hillary-flashback-no-new-york-should-not-recognize-same-sex-marriages_979108.html


Jeez.....you would have thought that after Arkansas she would have learned a little something about Omertà.

Steven Frisch

Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 26 June 2015 at 11:57 AM


Sorry Todd, you blog is not 'unmoderated' you have blocked certain ISP accounts from your blog. I know because I know someone who has played tag with you over that issue. Comments with names and e-mails attached have been blocked on your blog if people are critical of your point of view. So don't get up in other people's faces when they block comments, you do the EXACT same thing.

Ben Emery

George,
Econ 101 was just how it was written on the blog. I have sent a message to my brother about a portion of economics that is ignored in major economic curriculum and in the business world. He has a Masters in Economic and Community Development. Once I find out the name I will link more on it. All I can do it give my summarized version of a subject that I am familiar with at best. I will save your and my own time.

Gregory

Why, Frisch, I don't so much throw mudballs as I field your pop singles and catch your foul balls. Like late yesterday when you thought you were being clever in using the word 'ejaculate'. You really have been shooting blanks in many senses of the word. And, along with Jon and Jeffie, I think there's a basic difficulty when someone who isn't on the left stands up and fights over their sense of the truth in science and in life without resorting to the "Faux News" epithets so popular among 'you people'.

You've still ignored the recent actual science tossed your way, Steve... that Met office paper on solar activity. Fastest decline of the past 9300 years. What about it, Stevie?

Now, I say again, a Paul Emery might want to get a "Breaking Bread" style discussion going again, and "Global warming is not a crisis" is a fine question to be argued but the only participants should be those with a formal science background which should probably be more than biology. And they should expressly omit Steve Frisch who has shown, time and time again, a refusal to engage on the scientific issues.

Todd Juvinall

Steve Frisch, my blog is unmoderated. You are simply wrong. But what new?

Now your moderated blogs and Facebook are another story. You can't hack dissent nor will you answer questions. You and Pelline don't like the free speech in America.

Gregory

I probably wouldn't even be here had Jeff gotten tired of me winning arguments on his blog and barred me, even heavily editing my comments to change their meaning. In essence, providing a lie to his dwindling readership. Then there was that lie of his that I'd had a temper tantrum at a Constitution Day parade; that was in actuality a temper tantrum of Jeff's when I wouldn't provide to him a copy of a letter I wrote to a local organization of which I remain a member, and of which he firmly remains an outsider.

I've never been "right wing" but if the only local blog open to all is going to be a "right wing" blog, I don't have a problem participating.


STOP the Presses! It's been revealed on Pelline's blog that a number of CalAg license plates have been issued to Nevada County cars, going back a couple of years. Jeff's scoop wasn't, For those who didn't catch it, Jeff's response to my challenge to justify the carbon footprint hypocrisy of his monster truck tax deduction was to throw my successful landing after vapor lock, after which I played my gig at the Center for the Arts (Paul Emery ran the place at the time).

Why Jeffie thinks that's a big deal I've not a clue; I suppose I should just be content knowing that, after all these years, that's all he has.

Steven Frisch

Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 26 June 2015 at 01:22 PM

You are lying Todd and I know that for a fact. No doubt about it.

Whereas I have rules on my FB page, and my business has rules on their social media venues, and the very first time you tried to post you broke the rules, so you are banned from life; and we own it, so we don't have to answer to anyone about banning you for life, but we are also not lying about our practices.

Plus the point that you would equate this with some 'free speech issue' really shows utterly clueless you are about free speech. These are private venues, the owners can whatever they damn well please.

Todd Juvinall

Steve Frisch, you are just wrong. My blog is unmoderated. You are confusing your own blogs. You moderate, I don't.

When I posted on your blog I simply asked for an accounting of your taxpayer paid soiree to Red China. You blocked me and refuse to this day to tell the taxpayers how you spent their money.

Free speech is dead at SBC as moderated by Steve Frisch.

fish

....so you are banned from life;

Wow.....you guys are strict!

George Rebane

Gregory 127pm - "I probably wouldn't even be here had Jeff gotten tired of me ..." I didn't know that. The good Lord sure does work in mysterious ways, and most likely He's not done yet.

Barry Pruett

Steve said: "Sorry Todd, you blog is not 'unmoderated' you have blocked certain ISP accounts from your blog." No offense Todd, but Todd can be as full of crap as anyone, but BlogSpot does not have an option to block ISPs. Wordpress (i.e. Jeff Pelline blocks folks that do not agree with him all the time), but Todd does not have the ability using BlogSpot.

Todd Juvinall

Thanks for the compliment Barry. You are correct and my blog allows all to post. Of course if they use profanity in nasty ways I can delete their comment. Haven't done that for a long time.

Steven Frisch

Posted by: Barry Pruett | 26 June 2015 at 02:08 PM


Could be third party software, or placing comments on hold and then not publishing them, I don't know how he is doing it but I know he is doing it. Which is his right he just should not get away with lying about it.

Jeff Pelline

Here's an summary of Gregory's (AKA "Mr. Science's) vapor lock airplane accident. The damage to his aircraft was "substantial," as the report notes:
http://www.aircraftone.com/aircraft/accidents/20060802x01075.asp

BlogSpot does have an option to block commenters. I guess Todd and Barry just don't know how it works.

Don Bessee

Its nice to see the dark lord of liberal lament land is in his lefty glory only talking to frischy and the new 'ann' in his free speech exclusion zone. Gregory, you clearly have nailed em again! A link from 2006 is the best lefty jeffy has in the way of intelligent (reportedly)repartee?!? LOL Everyone repeat after me- Cast thee out demon and back to your pit of puss. (flinging fingers moistened with blessed chardonnay at the monitor along with chanting) Repeat 3 times daily as necessary. ;-)

George Boardman

Jeffy seems to be in a bad mood today.

First, he takes on The Union for sponsoring auxiliary events that (gasp) might make a profit, and then he trashes Nevada County Gold without bothering to mention that it's a big competitor for local ad dollars. He seems particularly upset that NC Gold's latest edition devotes nine of its first 10 pages to ads--something he can only dream about.

Would you like some sour grapes with that whine?

George Rebane

re JeffP's 309pm - the comment stands, but does anyone know what purpose this posting of the link to GregG's accident serves? It is apparently a matter of public record of which no denials have been made. I don't see how it might even diminish Greg. Peculiar. But I suppose that Todd will be interested in BlogSpot's capability to block commenters. I know that TypePad provides that ability, and many times I've considered using it with Pelline - but hope springs eternal.

Now about that novel use for "blessed chardonnay" from DonB's 327pm ... ;-)

fish

Posted by: George Rebane | 26 June 2015 at 03:49 PM

Another feeble attempt at character assassination by our little jeffy.

Paul Emery

George

Might I add that Healthcare eats up 17% of of our GDP far higher than any EU country. It's actually gone down a little since Obamacare.

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.TOTL.ZS

Todd Juvinall

Steve Frisch 2:18 PM

No lying by me, you are simply fibbing to draw attention to yourself like a 11 year old little girl.

I think Pelline is just sad that his nemesis was not a deadly casualty. The guy is one sick puppy on steroids. I am glad Greggory was OK. Jeeze!

Blogger has a moderation button that I can use but don't.

GeorgeB, I think you are on to something.

The comments to this entry are closed.