Interesting video on world economies and freedom

[chopnhack]

http://www.economicfreedom.org/2011/...america-today/

[woodturner]

http://www.economicfreedom.org/2011/...america-today/

It is an interesting video. I always find it interesting how presenters "spin" the information to suggest a conclusion. I think the technical term is "propaganda" .

In this particular video, note which numbers they cite in comparison, and which they don't. For example, they say a document has "grown to 81,000 pages" - without stating what it was previously. It could have grown by a single page.

Some of the "facts" stated in the video are incorrect. For example, they say unemployment is close to 9% and say that is the highest since the depression. According to the bureau of labor and statistics, unemployment reached nearly 11% in 1982, the highest level since 1948. FWIW, something in the range of 6% unemployment is considered "full employment" (i.e. everyone who wants a job has one) and unemployment was close to 25% during the Great Depression.

I'm usually curious about the background and motivation of the speakers as well. This video seemed politically biased to me and rather on the liberal side. It would be interesting to know the background and qualifications of the person making the arguments. He or she assumes that deficit spending causes economic problems, but many economists argue just the opposite, citing the example of World War II where deficit spending brought the country out of the Great Depression. We all like simple arguments we can easily understand, but unfortunately most topics, including economics, cannot be reduced to a few simple statements without losing accuracy.

[cabinetman]

It is an interesting video. I always find it interesting how presenters "spin" the information to suggest a conclusion. I think the technical term is "propaganda" .

I think the video was done well showing country comparisons as they are. Dollar figures, and unemployment statistics are verifiable. What conclusions are you saying they are suggesting?

.

[chopnhack]

Some of the "facts" stated in the video are incorrect. For example, they say unemployment is close to 9% and say that is the highest since the depression.

Actually what is stated in the video is that "its the longest streak of high unemployment since the great depression" not that its the highest since the depression.

I'm usually curious about the background and motivation of the speakers as well. This video seemed politically biased to me and rather on the liberal side. It would be interesting to know the background and qualifications of the person making the arguments. He or she assumes that deficit spending causes economic problems, but many economists argue just the opposite, citing the example of World War II where deficit spending brought the country out of the Great Depression.

Politics aside, and not know who put out the video or why and not arguing on the fact that many believe that deficit spending was necessary during the great depression (as it was) the statement made by the video wasn't slanderous against either president or political party as both had increased the national debt tremendously (the latter more than the former for the events that occurred during each tenure). The statement was quite factual "But runaway government spending and burdensome regulations have caused a decline in economic freedom in the United States". If a liberal made this statement, I would have to whole heartedly agree! I am sure you can find many examples of overburdensome laws and wasteful legislature.

I feel aban coming on now that I have been outed as a conservative :P

[sweensdv]

" But runaway government spending and burdensome regulations..........."

Sounds like a political point of view to me, which are not allowed here.

[Black wallnut]

"I feel a ban coming on now that I have been outed as a conservative :P"

No the ban will not happen due to your being a conservative, and liberals are not banned because they admit they are liberal. Bans happen for rules violations. Threads get locked or deleted due to rules violations, and this one is teetering.

The current economic situation is a great topic and well worth discussing, just not here if folks are going to bring partisan politics into it.

[sweensdv]

While I know its been beat to death, the way that the rules are interpreted as to what is and isn't considered partisan politics, this much is for sure, that interpretation has not been very consistent. Any kind of political statement should be considered partisan as no political statement will be agreed to by 100% of the people that read it. All I'm saying is that if there is to be a no politics policy here then it must be enforced 100% of the time no matter how teetering the statement(s) may be. A consistent policy of deleting a post or the locking of a thread will get the message across much more effectively than an occasional example of those actions that happens now.

[jackellis]

This is in no way directed at the original poster or any other forum members who are inclined to agree with the OP and disagree with me. If it's worded a bit sharply, that's because I'm pretty steamed right now about a "rule" published by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission last week that's based on unsupportable claims and twisted logic.

[Rant On]
I'm sorry but this is a propaganda piece, plain and simple. Like statistics, many of the facts don't lie, but you can intersperse a set of verifiable facts with conjecture, opinions and assertions to mislead people. Moreover, some of the "facts" just do not pass the smell test, like claiming the cost of regulatory compliance is close to $2 trillion per year.

For one thing, there's no definition of "economic freedom". It appears to be an index, but indexes have inherent biases, no matter how impartial its creator tries to make it, and I'm sure the group that created this one has an agenda. For another, while I'm no fan of regulators or regulation, less of it would be necessary if the folks at whom regulation was targeted used more common sense or practiced a little more self-restraint.

Like most issues, there's more than one side to the "economic freedom" argument, and I'll provide two examples. EPA has been trying for many years to get owners of coal-fired power plants to clean up stack emissions, which include lots of nasty things like mercury, particulates and sulfur dioxide. Yes, it costs money and yes, it increases electricity prices, but if you think it's unimportant, fly through the summer haze around Monument Valley, which is caused in large part by these emissions. I promise you'll be seeing what you breathe. The surrounding area is not densely populated, but people do live there.

The other example that strikes close to home for me is leaded aviation fuel. Thirty or so years after it was banned in automotive fuel, the general aviation industry is in a panic because an environmental group has sued to ban the use of leaded aviation fuel that many small airplanes can't do without. There are, in fact, four alternatives now under development, but only because the general aviation advocacy groups now have their backs to the wall. Had the GA advocacy groups instead owned up to the risks posed by leaded fuels, even if the amounts were small, and pushed for a solution 30 years ago, no one would be thinking about new regulations, much less pursuing a lawsuit.

The larger issue is how to balance a public interest in clean air, for example, against private economic interests. Not simple, but using the threat of an economic apocalypse to argue that we're being regulated to death isn't reasoned, reasonable or credible. Besides, the cause of the current economic malaise probably has more to do with our success at harnessing technology and automation than just about any other factor.

[Rant Off]

[Black wallnut]

While I know its been beat to death, the way that the rules are interpreted as to what is and isn't considered partisan politics, this much is for sure, that interpretation has not been very consistent. Any kind of political statement should be considered partisan as no political statement will be agreed to by 100% of the people that read it. All I'm saying is that if there is to be a no politics policy here then it must be enforced 100% of the time no matter how teetering the statement(s) may be. A consistent policy of deleting a post or the locking of a thread will get the message across much more effectively than an occasional example of those actions that happens now.

Such is the delicate balance the staff attempts to have. We are not in total agreement as to where the exact line is on what is within bounds and what is out of bounds. The rule is "avoid religion and politics" which is not exactly a black and white rule. Due to this we, the staff, have to take a case by case basis for any decisions related to rules violations. None of us wish to over-moderate, all of us thinking that the forum seems to mostly be self correcting. What does happen behind the scenes that those other than the staff do not see is we have been very consistent in drawing the line when someone uses the "report post/thread" feature of the software. Nearly all of the time when a thread or post is reported it results in moderation happening.

[chopnhack]

Well said jack!
For the record, the Koch brothers are behind this video.
Agreed, the economic freedom graph is what first caught my eye about the video. It is certainly crafted to catch your attention. After watching a second and third time I asked myself just exactly what it was a measure of and couldn't find an answer, whatever it may be, I am sure it would be overly subjective...what economic freedom is to a poor man is not the same as to a millionaire! If you watch the first video, there was also a "happiness index" and a "corruption index" and most of the data was provided by the same group, the Fraser institute making the objectivity very low.

As for regulatory compliance costing $1.75 trillion, I am not sure, but I will say that the excessive burden of our government placed on businesses in general have forced many companies out of the US. There was a great statement recently from Intel's CEO Otellini, "I can tell you definitively that it costs $1 billion more per factory for me to build, equip, and operate a semiconductor manufacturing facility in the United States." If it costs his business $1 billion alone more to run in the US, maybe that $2 trillion isn't so far off. To be fair, I don't know how they derived that figure or what sources were used, just saying its food for thought.

The take home message for me was that excess government and legislation has caused business and wage stagnation in the US. That is a concept I can agree with.

My apologies to sween, my intent was really solely an interest in the video and its conclusion.

[LCHIEN]

As a moderator I sense this thread teetering on the edge of politics.

Its statements like this:
"I'm usually curious about the background and motivation of the speakers as well. This video seemed politically biased to me and rather on the liberal side."

and this:
The take home message for me was that excess government and legislation has caused business and wage stagnation in the US. That is a concept I can agree with.

I know its tough but you have to discuss economic problems without criticizing the government and pointing fingers. Some of us persist in posting provactive topics...

[jackellis]

I'm not surprised to hear the Koch brothers are behind the video.

I agree that complying with government regulations costs money and is a PITA for businesses. I can cite instances where regulations are based on emotion, lobbying by interest groups hoping to gain an economic advantage, and interest groups with all other kinds of agendas. There are plenty of rules that have not been well thought out. But I can also cite a number of cases where businesses created a mess and then failed to clean them up. There's a huge open pit copper mine in Butte that contains toxic waste. GE dumped PCBs into the Hudson River and then refused to clean it up. IBM and others in San Jose used carcinogenic chemicals in semiconductor and circuit board manufacturing and then tried to duck responsibility for cleaning up contaminated drinking water. TVA's failure to keep a coal waste dump in good repair led to a five million cubic yard discharge into the Tennessee River. How about those coal miners in West Virginia?

Businesses aren't the only ones who lack self-discipline. There was an article today about pot growers in Northern California who have been taking unfair advantage of a consumer-subsidized program for low income families to avoid paying full price for the large amounts of electricity they use in grow houses. In San Francisco, groups have argued for shutting down two power plants that help maintain electric service on the basis of "environmental justice", which is shorthand for moving the problem to someone else's doorstep.

Like I said earlier, a little self-restraint and some common sense might go a long way towards stemming the tide of increasing regulation.

BTW, an article in today's New York Times talks about the impact of technology and automation on employment.

[woodturner]

There was a great statement recently from Intel's CEO Otellini, "I can tell you definitively that it costs $1 billion more per factory for me to build, equip, and operate a semiconductor manufacturing facility in the United States."

I think it is important to understand why it costs more to build a semiconductor fab in the US.

In the US, we have regulations that protect workers and the public. In the US, for example, one must protect the workers from the toxic and carcinogenic chemicals used in the semiconductor fabs. These protections cost a lot, but save lives.

In some other countries, protection is not required. As a result, workers are exposed to harmful and lethal chemicals. The jobs pay well, though, so they take the jobs to support their families, even though they know that job will kill them in time.

Personally, I would rather protect and preserve human life.

[HauntedBranch]

Regulation is a legitimate subject for discussion (subject to the moderator's interpretation of the rules) but it seems pretty clear to me that lack of regulation and the country's (negative) attitude toward regulation was a huge factor in bringing about the current economic train wreck. Another cause was greed but that's another rant (or is it?).

[chopnhack]

Loring, I am not attacking anyone I really enjoy polite discourse and the statement that you flagged is not condemning of anyone party but our collective government, federal as well as state and local municipalities. On the whole there are many finely run departments out there. As with everything in life its the less than 10% that ruin things for the rest.
I enjoy reading the thoughts of our members, I have been here a long time and I am not trying to incite flames, just thought. I also get very educated and thought provoking responses that open new avenues, at least for me, to explore. Thus my interest in discussing some of these items with members.

There is a need for regulation and perhaps better oversight on those entrusted to write the rules as well as enforce the rules. There is also too much of a good thing

Awesome link Jack, I read a recent one in a local paper regarding the "speedup" that has been ongoing on the american worker to take the place of hiring more people. No wonder profits are unusually high. Typically an economic reversal occurs when companies start increasing wages allowing for more disposable income to be spent thus further stimulating the economy. But most companies are keeping a tight rain on the cash for fear of current "situation".

Woodturner, that may be one reason and it certainly is a very important reason and a great point you raise, but I do believe that there is more to the picture of Intel's increased cost of doing business here. I would also cite electricity prices, insurance and probably taxation.

Haunted, yes some regulation is needed and greed did lead us down a path, but was it the individual citizen or was it mostly the special interest groups? On the other side of the coin lending practices that were enforced upon the banks by the government to further ECOA such as using government aid as a source of income on loan applications really are what brought upon the demise. It was just bad business but required to satisfy regulations.