tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-69452123002193238172024-02-22T07:55:44.422-05:00Leaning LeftwardPBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.comBlogger53125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-55885628236633365142014-01-30T17:37:00.002-05:002014-01-30T17:37:39.370-05:00<br />
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span style="text-decoration: underline;"><b>What The Fuckonomics – Bitcoin Edition</b></span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<span style="text-decoration: underline;"><b></b></span><br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>I’ve frequently criticized bitcoin in light of its growing popularity and the increasing attention it has received from economics writers and thinkers on the internet. However, my issues with bitcoin are both too numerous and too complex to be spelled out in 140 character bites. As a result, I’ve spent the last several days drafting this lengthy analysis of how traditional currencies work, what bitcoin is, and how bitcoin performs – or fails to perform – the same functions as ordinary currencies. </div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span style="text-decoration: underline;">What is bitcoin?</span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Let’s start at the very beginning here by asking the rudimentary question: what is bitcoin? Bitcoin is the predominate player in the new market of “cryptocurrencies” that has grown rapidly over the last couple of years. To put it very simply, bitcoin is a digital currency which is not attached to any government entity. This means that bitcoin does not have the official backing of a government or central bank as most sovereign national currencies do. The lack of attachment to a national government or a central bank is often a selling point for bitcoin as many of its adherents and investors tend to subscribe to various strands of libertarian ideology.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Rather than being “printed” like existing fiat currencies (The concept of printing currency is anachronistic in the digital age and is in some senses counterproductive, sparking as it does mental comparisons to inter-war German citizens using wheelbarrows full of freshly printed marks to purchase groceries. However, it is conceptually accurate enough to serve here.), bitcoins are mined. Bitcoin mining is performed by computers solving increasingly complicated equations. The rate of increase of the complexity of the equations is set in such a way as to control the growth rate of the total money supply in the bitcoin economy for a certain period of time, after which point all bitcoins will have been mined and the number of bitcoins in circulation will remain fixed.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Bitcoin transactions are completed via an encrypted process that transfers funds from the account of one user to another. All transactions must be verified by all other bitcoin users in order to ensure that no double counting occurs. However in practice, this function is largely monitored and maintained by a small subset of bitcoin users with the technical capacity to do so. Due to the encrypted nature of the transactions, bitcoins enable anonymous transaction. This is another major selling point of bitcoin to many users.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Having sketched out the broad details of what bitcoin is and how it works (poorly and imprecisely, given my rudimentary understanding of the technical details), it’s time to move on to the next logical question. To wit – what is a currency and to what extent, and how successfully, does bitcoin mimic the attributes of a traditional currency?</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<span style="text-decoration: underline;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span style="text-decoration: underline;">What is currency?</span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Generally speaking, currencies are deemed to share three defining functions and three defining characteristics. </div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>The characteristics are:</div>
<ul style="list-style-type: disc;">
<ul style="list-style-type: hyphen;">
<li style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">Rarity</li>
<li style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">Indestructability</li>
<li style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">Divisibility</li>
</ul>
</ul>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>The functions are:</div>
<ul style="list-style-type: disc;">
<ul style="list-style-type: hyphen;">
<li style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">Medium of Exchange</li>
<li style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">Unit of Account</li>
<li style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">Store of Value</li>
</ul>
</ul>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>I’ll take these one at a time to describe how traditional currencies execute these functions and how bitcoin compares. Bitcoin largely possesses the characteristics that currency must possess, however its functionality leaves much to be desired in my opinion, making it unlikely to ever be widely adopted as a substitute for traditional currencies.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<span style="text-decoration: underline;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span style="text-decoration: underline;">Rarity</span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>While currencies are not required to be extremely rare (gold and silver are actually surprisingly abundant elements), they must be sufficiently rare to ensure that the supply is not subject to drastic swings. This is mostly to ensure that individuals cannot create meaningfully large stocks of previously uncirculated currency to enrich themselves and/or debase the currency. In modern economies, this requirement for rarity has been replaced by a slightly different characteristic that achieves the same end, namely the status of a central bank as the monopoly issuer of currency. While US dollars themselves are not comprised of rare or difficult to attain materials, the social and legal norms that we have created successfully achieve the same end as rarity did in more simplistic economies that used precious metal coins, etc. for currency.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>As advertised, bitcoins are certainly rare enough to act as a currency. The supply of them is fairly limited, there is an upper limit on the total supply, and the rate of growth of supply is predetermined. While I am personally skeptical that the bitcoin system is technically robust enough to ensure that no “counterfeiting” occurs, this is merely an impression of mine formed with an obvious lack of technical knowledge for me to verify my concern. That being the case, I’d give bitcoin a passing grade on this score.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<span style="text-decoration: underline;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span style="text-decoration: underline;">Indestructability</span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>This is not to say that currency must be literally indestructible, but it must be relatively permanent and not subject to too much damage. The reasoning here is fairly obvious. Nobody would ever consider using something that degrades quickly as a currency as they would in short order see their wealth literally disintegrating in front of them. Precious metal coinage again demonstrates why it represented much of the history of currency, as it clearly passes this test. In modern fiat monetary systems, this problem has been tackled in a couple ways. Firstly, currency is constantly pulled out of circulation and replaced to ensure that it remains usable. Secondly, much of the “currency” used in modern economies is digital at this point, and therefore not subject to physical degradation.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Again, bitcoin has the characteristic of indestructability in the same way that digital US dollars that exist merely as computer entries in your bank account are, virtually, indestructible. With respect to both bitcoin and electronic dollars, I find that there is some question as to whether they really meet this criterion. While your digital wealth may not be able to be destroyed, and lack of internet access or other technological problems can potentially make your wealth either temporarily or permanently inaccessible. This is a broader concern of our increasingly digitized economy.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<span style="text-decoration: underline;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span style="text-decoration: underline;">Divisibility</span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>This characteristic is very easy to understand from a pragmatic perspective. All economic transactions are not going to occur in neat increments. As a result, your currency must be divisible into smaller units to facilitate all transactions. Historically this was often done by physically clipping metal coins into smaller pieces to execute smaller transactions. In our modern economy, this is done by offering a wide range of larger or smaller increments (including the too small and totally unnecessary penny – but that’s a gripe for a different day).</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>In this area, cryptocurrencies are actually far superior to traditional currencies. There’s nothing to prevent bitcoins from being transacted in virtually any increment. Particularly as the value of existing bitcoins grows, it will probably become very common for goods or services to cost .0001 bitcoins. The very digital nature of the currency makes this characteristic a moot point.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<span style="text-decoration: underline;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span style="text-decoration: underline;">Medium of Exchange</span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>According to most economic historians, the creation of the first currencies was an organic process intended to solve a basic problem in early human societies. Economies have always entailed the exchange of goods and services among individuals. Initially these exchanges were fairly simplistic and were generally executed via barter. A farmer in need of new equipment may agree to trade a certain quantity of wheat for new farm implements produced by a blacksmith, for example. However, increasingly complex societies soon found themselves with a problem. Barter transactions can only occur in situations in which two or more parties find themselves with a mutual incidence of wants or needs. That is to say, it is necessary that each party to a transaction have something desired by the other party in sufficient quantity to facilitate a trade. Even if very basic economies, such mutual incidence of wants are frequently absent. So a blacksmith may be more than happy to trade a portion of his output to the farmer, but may have no current need of wheat.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>In these instances, the benefit of currency as a medium of exchange becomes immediately obvious. Currencies serve as a means of bridging the gap in the wants and needs of various economic actors. With a currency, the previously referenced blacksmith can sell tools to a farmer in return for an agreed upon amount of the local currency. The blacksmith can then use the income gained in this way to purchase whatever goods she may desire without concern for arranging a barter transaction.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Bitcoin fulfills this role quite nicely, and even has some advantages over traditional currencies in this respect. Firstly, bitcoin allows for transactions in illegal goods that would otherwise have to take place using physical cash. While the “benefit” here may seem dubious to some, from a purely economic perspective, it is facilitating a subset of commercial transactions that were previously much more difficult. Secondly, the payment architecture of bitcoin relies much less on intermediaries than traditional alternatives. Most transactions have to flow through a bank, and ultimately a central bank, to be cleared. While there is in some sense an intermediary in the bitcoin economy since all transactions must be registered with other users, there is no central clearing authority (While this can be viewed as a strength of bitcoin, it does carry the risk that there is no central authority to resolve disputes over payments). Thirdly, bitcoin makes international transactions, which can take a great deal of time and be fairly complicated, much easier.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>In the role of a media of exchange, cryptocurrencies could be very successful and may even spark more innovation by more traditional financial intermediaries. The anonymity and speed of bitcoin transactions, along with the agnosticism with respect to national borders, could make its transaction architecture a model for future development, whether the bitcoin currency itself ultimately thrives or dies off.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<span style="text-decoration: underline;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span style="text-decoration: underline;">Unit of Account</span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>The unit of account function of a currency is fairly simple to understand. Once human societies moved beyond a subsistence level, it became increasingly important to have a standardized way to track wealth and value and to price the goods and services that one may be offering or seeking in the economy. For example, individuals who opted to save a portion of current output for future consumption needed a means of valuing and tracking this wealth. Merchants, farmers, businesses, and governments similarly required a means to track the value of stored wealth over time. Additionally, currencies allowed for meaningful price comparisons by creating a standardized measure of value.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Bitcoin has trouble fulfilling this function currently, although it is not impossible that it grow into this role over time. At the moment, very few goods are services are priced in bitcoins. It is much more common, even among merchants that transact in bitcoins, to price their goods and services in a traditional currency (usually either the local currency or a major international reserve currency such as the dollar or the euro). Transactions are then completed based on the spot exchange rate between the currency in which the good is priced and bitcoins. Over its brief history, the exchange value of bitcoins in terms of other major currencies has been extremely volatile. This is less than ideal for a currency, and makes it extremely risky for a person to price a good in bitcoins and accept the exchange rate risk that that entails. One could quickly find that the value of her good or service priced in bitcoins has changed drastically in terms of whatever local currency she will be converting her bitcoins to after a transaction.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<span style="text-decoration: underline;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span style="text-decoration: underline;">Store of Value</span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Given their nature as relatively rare and relatively permanent, currencies have historically been used largely as a way to accumulate and store wealth. In the case of precious metals and the like, this is done very simply by maintaining physical hoards of currency. The modern corollary is to save funds in a bank account denominated in the local currency (Which will, of course, lose some value over time due to inflation. This gets into a much larger discussion of central banking and how monetary policy impacts the larger economy. While it may seem evasive not to address this issue – particularly since so many bitcoin advocates point to “theft” via inflation as one of the reasons to purchase bitcoins – it is an ancillary point in an analysis of bitcoin itself as a currency, rather than in its role as a competitor to fiat currencies.).</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Here again, bitcoin’s extremely volatile exchange rate does it a serious disservice. While the price trend of bitcoin has clearly been up, this general upward movement has been interrupted by sharp downward corrections. When individuals choose to store their wealth in a currency, they are generally hoping to avoid volatility. Certainly, having one’s savings in a currency that is drastically increasing in value is beneficial, but being unable to have a fairly stable value for your accumulated wealth, and lacking the ability to pull it out at a stable price for one’s needs, is detrimental. As such, when viewed merely on its merits as a store of wealth – and not as a speculative investment – bitcoin seems to fall short.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<span style="text-decoration: underline;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span style="text-decoration: underline;">Bitcoin as Speculative Investment</span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Much of bitcoin’s recent cache has developed from the stratospheric increase in its value over the last one to two years. This raises a few interesting questions for bitcoin’s future as a legitimate currency. First, there is nothing wrong, theoretically, with bitcoin as an investment vehicle. It does differ from the majority of speculative investments in that it has no intrinsic value. Shares of stock, for example, represent a legal entitlement to the future revenue streams of the issuing company. Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) generally have some underlying tangible asset, such as bonds, shares of stock, physical capital, etc. upon which their value is based. Traditional sovereign currencies enjoy a monopoly on financial transactions with the government of the country in question, which provides them with at least a minimal “real” value beyond their transactional value for other private goods and services. However, bitcoin is hardly alone in having no intrinsic value placing a floor under its price.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Having said that, the current speculative fever surrounding bitcoin actually does significant damage to its ability to function as a currency. Given the common view that bitcoins will only go up in value, there is a reasonable desire on the part of many market participants to hoard them. This makes fewer of them available for commercial exchange, which adds volatility to the market price of bitcoins and increases the difficulty of transactions. While to date this issue has not become too serious, largely because new bitcoins are still being mined and because the real transactional demands on the system have been low thus far, it could be a major problem in the future.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<span style="text-decoration: underline;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span style="text-decoration: underline;">So, is bitcoin really a currency?</span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Bitcoin is, in some respects, like a traditional currency. It is most similar to a currency, and most likely to have a lasting impact on the global financial system, as a medium of exchange. While there are still some problems to be resolved, bitcoin has already demonstrated its usefulness in facilitating transactions. Furthermore, it has done so in a way that has filled two important gaps left by existing, traditional currencies. First, bitcoin has made international transactions much simpler in many respects. Particularly given the hesitancy of many US financial institutions to update their payment architecture for a globalized and digitized world, bitcoin could play an important role in developing means to execute international transactions and transfers without relying on banks or the few competitors to banks that have arisen in this space, such as PayPal.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Second, bitcoin has been a trailblazer in the field of facilitating illegal or unsavory transactions, mostly for illegal drugs, but also for weapons or other illegal services. Eschewing any question of morality, this aspect of bitcoin does entail a certain risk to its legitimate functions. If bitcoin becomes associated largely with its role in black markets and criminal activity (or its related role in money laundering and avoiding capital controls in closed financial systems), it is almost certain to earn the scrutiny and ire of government officials around the globe. This could carry serious risks for those holding bitcoins for legitimate commercial or investment purposes.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>However, beyond its role as an effective medium of exchange, I believe that bitcoin currently fails to achieve the other two traditional functions of currency listed above. The fact that the market for bitcoins is currently extremely shallow – there are few participants and even fewer with sufficient stores of bitcoins and the requisite desire to transact in them – means that it is likely to remain volatile for some time. Especially as the total number of bitcoins in circulation approaches its predetermined maximum, this tendency could be exacerbated even further, leading to major bouts of deflation in the bitcoin economy.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<span style="text-decoration: underline;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span style="text-decoration: underline;">Conclusion</span></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>While bitcoin “works” as a currency in some sense right now, it cannot continue to do so in its present form. The stability required of currencies will only develop to the extent that bitcoins become widely accepted. Additionally, the number of commercial entities transacting in bitcoins must grow so that consumers feel they can use bitcoins for many, or most, of their commercial purposes. Given the technical complexity, the (possibly unfair) association with illegal activity, and the novelty of the concept, I find it unlikely that the requisite widespread adoption will occur. Additionally, I think the opacity and concentration of bitcoin holdings will continue to place deflationary pressure on the system, further reducing its usefulness as a currency. These issues may not be insoluble, but I believe they are sufficient hurtles to ensure that bitcoin remains, at best, a niche product for speculative investors, ideological libertarians who appreciate its separation from the traditional financial system, and those wishing to utilize it for illegal activities.</div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; min-height: 14.0px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font: 12.0px Times; margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px;">
<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>Also, too, bitcoins are fucking stupid.</div>
PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-10759937637401530382011-04-12T22:16:00.000-04:002011-04-12T22:16:32.528-04:00When Circumstances Treat Obama UnfairlyVia Sam Stein at the Huffington Post, the deal struck Friday night apparently <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/11/obamas-high-speed-rail-budget-deal_n_847587.html">contained $1.5 billion in cuts to Obama's proposed high speed rail budget</a>.<br />
<br />
In this situation, people like me and others on the left will criticize Obama for caving on a major priority and cutting from a rail infrastructure budget that was too small to begin with.<br />
<br />
People on the right will still make hysterical claims that Obama is a scary, African socialist-Muslim.<br />
<br />
The only people that will be pleased by this kind of policy are the bland Washington punditocracy who may take it as a sign of moderation and seriousness. Unfortunately, the punditocracy has found itself almost comically unwilling to say anything good about any Obama policies.PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-59295006428462339982011-04-12T22:08:00.000-04:002011-04-12T22:08:15.192-04:00Liberalism Gone WildI have to admit, when I saw <a href="http://www.slashfood.com/2011/04/08/boston-bans-soda-on-city-property/">this headline</a> about a city attempting to curtail all sugary drinks in municipal offices, my immediate guess was San Francisco. So congratulations, Boston! You surprised me.<br />
<br />
I support instituting taxes to increase the cost of food products with harmful health impacts. Taxes on alcohol, cigarettes, gambling and other activities with public safety or public health implications are widely accepted. Capturing the cost of those societal externalities is good public policy.<br />
<br />
But this sort of heavy handed attempt to control people's choices - especially when done by a public employer - is exactly the kind of awful policy that partially validates conservative claims that liberals want to introduce a nanny state.PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-51595797166783047332011-04-11T23:17:00.000-04:002011-04-11T23:17:03.276-04:00No, we don't have a health care crisis in our country. Why do you ask?<a href="http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/oakland-coliseum-people-stand-all-nig">These stories</a>, this one via Crooks & Liars, about free health care clinics and the terribly long lines that they draw, are really depressing. How we can have a situation where one half of our political system basically waves its hand at this issue and says, "Nothing to see here," is beyond me.PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-80228706146659953112011-04-11T23:07:00.000-04:002011-04-11T23:07:00.966-04:00My State's Incredibly Bloated Legislature<a href="http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/04/pennsylvania_legislative_staff_1.html">Many</a>, <a href="http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/04/pennsylvania_government_staffe.html">many</a> <a href="http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/04/3_of_harrisburg-area_lawmakers.html">stories</a> about the amazingly wasteful institution that is the Pennsylvania Legislature. These stories are focusing on legislative staff, rather than the actual wasteful, expensive legislators themselves.<br />
<br />
Allow me to summarize:<br />
<br />
The Legislature is huge, with lots of unnecessary members.<br />
<br />
Each legislator's staff is huge, with lots of unnecessary employees.<br />
<br />
Overall, the thing is big, inefficient and very expensive.PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-87193688445961177012011-04-11T22:43:00.000-04:002011-04-11T22:43:25.810-04:00And Right on ScheduleI missed this from earlier today, but apropos of an earlier post, <a href="http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/20110411_Teamsters_rally_to_fight_right-to-work_bill.html">right to work legislation has apparently already been put forward in the Pennsylvania House</a>.PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-14716299163657630462011-04-11T21:37:00.000-04:002011-04-11T21:37:17.269-04:00Mitt Romney is Running for President<a href="http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/11/romney-forms-presidential-exploratory-committee/?hpt=T2">No surprises</a>, and I don't have much to add.<br />
<br />
Nevertheless, it is sad when the one who believes in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_garments">magic underwear</a> is the "serious" GOP candidate.PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-14233696697573343962011-04-11T19:51:00.000-04:002011-04-11T19:51:40.978-04:00Is America Europe's Mexico?Free Exchange led me to <a href="http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ikea-union-20110410,0,5341610.story">this piece</a> from the LA Times. To quickly summarize, the story discusses an Ikea manufacturing plant in Danville, Virginia. Workers there are apparently trying to unionize, claiming they are suffering from relatively low pay, strict work conditions, unpredictable schedules, forced overtime and multiple cases of racial discrimination. The workers are also taking issue with the fact that employees doing virtually identical jobs at facilities in Sweden enjoy higher pay, better conditions and more paid vacation.<br />
<br />
Ikea has a relatively friendly image, both here in the States and in its home country. It is generally known as a responsible company and allows all of its employees in Sweden to unionize. According to the article, this has been a much bigger story in Sweden than in the US due to surprise at the companies seemingly incongruent actions. However, I don't see why anyone should be surprised. This is what companies do. Any operation that can be sent to an area with lower wages and weaker labor protections will be sent there. It just isn't that often that we in the US think of ourselves as a cheap labor substitute for more expensive workers. Driving home the point, an organizer from Danville, Bill Street said, "It's ironic that Ikea looks on the U.S. and Danville the way that most people in the U.S. look at Mexico."<br />
<br />
Unfortunately, Americans had better get used to it. Already within the country, states compete with one another by weakening environmental and labor laws in order to attract jobs from other states or other countries. This race to the bottom has set off pushes in many states to pass Right to Work laws to compete with lower wage states. The Commonwealth Foundation, a conservative think tank here in Pennsylvania, is a strong supporter of such a policy.<br />
<br />
I have no doubt that this sort of competition is going to become increasingly common as states desperately try to boost employment. So more states will be forced to compete with each other like they used to compete with Southeast Asia and Latin America. And all the while, we'll be even cheaper labor for our new Scandinavian overlords.PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-53913849144981372292011-04-11T05:48:00.000-04:002011-04-11T05:48:49.873-04:00Good for IcelandVia the BBC, <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13022524">Icelandic voters have rejected a deal</a> to reimburse Great Britain and the Netherlands for costs associated with the failure of Landsbanki. As of right now, Iceland seems to be the only country in the world that has decided to put the will of its citizens ahead of the needs of the private bankers that helped<br />
wreck the economy.<br />
<br />
Of course, the British and the Dutch will now take the matter to international courts in an attempt to get the money. I sincerely hope that the courts will rule that foreign creditors don't have the right to hold a sovereign nation and all of its taxpayers hostage in order to make good on the private debts of irresponsible bankers.PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-69181289079125092952011-04-08T00:07:00.000-04:002011-04-08T00:07:43.434-04:00The European Central Bank is Courting DisasterVia Matt Yglesias, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/08/business/global/08iht-rates08.html?_r=1&hp">I came across this news.</a> The ECB has decided that it is time to raise interest rates by a quarter percent to 1.25%.<br />
<br />
I can't think of a more irresponsible thing for the ECB to do, especially coming the day after the news that <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/07/business/global/07euro.html">Portugal will become the third country to request financial assistance from the EU.</a><br />
<br />
The sovereign crisis in Europe has slightly different causes and effects in different countries, but the predominant problem for Greece, Ireland, Portugal, etc. is the need to realign their prices and particularly wages with Germany and the Euro core. Tightening monetary policy and raising rates is one of the easiest ways to exacerbate that type of debt deflation problem, as the US learned during the Great Depression.<br />
<br />
It's difficult to imagine what goal the ECB is trying to achieve here. Bond markets are already demanding prohibitively high yields on the debt of troubled nations. This will make that problem even worse. It will make the entire process of price realignment slower and more costly on the local populations of peripheral Euro nations.<br />
<br />
This will very possibly have the other perverse consequence requiring ANOTHER round of bailouts for Irish banks. Higher rates means slower growth, more defaults and larger balances sheet problems for Irish banks and, ultimately, those banks' French and German creditors.<br />
<br />
The combination of financial sector bailouts and austerity budgets has already destabilized the Irish and Portuguese governments. There is already the chance that new successor governments in these nations may be less willing to play ball with EU authorities.<br />
<br />
I suspect that this drives us much, much closer to one or more nations deciding to pull out of the Euro. However, even if this doesn't undermine the Euro, I'd expect some very negative market reactions over the next week as people digest this change.PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-37035273969576960952011-04-06T21:29:00.000-04:002011-04-06T21:29:38.630-04:00Conservatives: Facebook is Part of the Obama Plot<a href="http://nation.foxnews.com/town-hall/2011/04/06/facebook-beginning-feel-wrath-conservatives">Picked up this little tidbit</a> over at The Fox Nation. Original story <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110406/ts_yblog_thelookout/facebook-beginning-to-feel-wrath-of-conservatives">here</a> at Yahoo! News.<br />
<br />
Apparently, conservatives are now outraged because Facebook intends to <a href="http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/05/obama-to-hold-facebook-town-hall/">hold an online town hall</a> for Obama and is <a href="http://abcnewsradioonline.com/business-news/robert-gibbs-to-manage-facebooks-communications.html">considering hiring Robert Gibbs</a> to be its new communications director. Apparently this is an outrage that is causing conservative activists to cancel their Facebook accounts in protest.<br />
<br />
I wish I could link directly to some of the comments on Fox Nation, but I'll just quote from them instead:<br />
<br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;">"I really like Facebook because I can keep up with my friends; however, if Gibbs is hired, I'm gone. Then it's only a matter of time before our posts will be monitored."<span><br />
</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;">"My whole family closed the account weeks ago. Did not see the need to help a progressive site along any more."<span><br />
</span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Times; font-size: small;">I can only imagine how exhausting it would be to fit every single event that occurred on a daily basis into your narrative about the massive, evil forces that were aligned against you. But when I patrol the right wings blogs, new sites, etc. that is exactly what I see people doing. Every event is suspect. Every coincidence is proof of the evil plots of shadowy enemies. I can't imagine expending the much energy on something so absurd.</span></span><br />
<br />
Of course, I'm sure it's only a coincidence that Fox and its parent News Corp., owner of MySpace, is helping to push this story.PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-21708875571103539302011-03-27T21:21:00.000-04:002011-03-27T21:21:09.767-04:00Deficit Reduction by Traffic TicketAnecdotal evidence proving that Tom Corbett's master plan to balance the budget consists of issuing massive numbers of speeding tickets. I have never seen so many state troopers on a round trip from Harrisburg to Pittsburgh on the Turnpike.PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-60477422966592947182011-03-27T14:35:00.000-04:002011-03-27T14:35:04.116-04:00Chris Wallace: WhinerChris Wallace over at Fox News <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/27/chris-wallace-slams-white-house-fox-news_n_841129.html">is super sad today</a>. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates made the Sunday talk show rounds this morning, but noticeably skipped out on Fox News. This prompted Wallace to complain on air, saying that they wanted the interviews but that the White House refused despite the fact that Fox News has the second highest number of viewers out of the four major network shows.<br />
<br />
First point: what a cry baby. I can't believe an alleged journalist is so thin skinned that he felt the need to complain to his entire nationwide audience because he couldn't book the big interview he wanted.<br />
<br />
Second: why is he surprised? Fox News has spent every on air moment since Obama's inauguration making itself an thinly veiled opposition outlet and the official media/propaganda arm of the GOP. Is he really surprised that the White House isn't keen on giving plum interviews to a "news" station that barely even tries to mask its contempt for him?<br />
<br />
Finally, a somewhat unrelated point.<br />
<br />
I'm really tired of Fox News acting as if ratings and number of viewers is some measure of the accuracy and veracity of the message they are broadcasting. When challenged for being a conscious liar and deceiver, O'Reilly will frequently cite his and Fox's ratings as some sort of evidence to the contrary. By this logic, the number of Big Macs sold is evidence the McDonald's is the best dining in the world, American Idol is the greatest program in the history of television, and crack is an absolutely great thing for people to do.PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-46424746082971274152011-03-27T11:06:00.000-04:002011-03-27T11:06:39.335-04:00Michele Bachmann: Revisionist HistorianThe right's most famous wide-eyed loon is at it again.<br />
<br />
This weekend marked a big event in Iowa that was a veritable parade of GOP presidential hopefuls. They were all there to woo the conservatives activists that will decide the nation's first primary. Of course, Tea Party favorite Michele Bachmann had to show up to lay some of her usual crazy on the audience.<br />
<br />
One thing that she said struck me as so foolishly ignorant that I needed to mention it. Bachmann <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/26/gop-iowa-steve-king-2012_n_840956.html#5_bachmann-sweeps-into-iowa">claimed</a> that, "The preservation of our nation is too important to entrust it to mere politicians. The founders recognized that it could only be entrusted to the brain trust, and that's the people of this nation." Yet again, Bachmann is showing that all of her grandstanding aside, she has no understanding whatsoever of the founding of our country.<br />
<br />
The men who wrote the Constitution did not entrust the maintenance of our freedom to the people. One wonders if Bachmann has ever heard of the Electoral College. In case she hasn't, let me explain. The Founders hated the idea that the common man would be in charge of the political process. They thought that most people were simple, uneducated rubes who basically needed to be governed by their betters, for their own good. One of the ways they ensured that was to create the Electoral College. As everyone who has taken a 4th grade history classes knows, the Constitution created a body of "politicians" that would select the president based up on the popular election results from the people. This is just one example of how the Founders placed barriers in the way of direct rule by the "brain trust" that Bachmann referenced.<br />
<br />
Want more examples? How about the fact that only white, property owning men over a certain age were allowed to vote. Does that sound like the policy of a group that wanted "the people" to be guarantors of the nation? How about the fact that Senators were chosen not by the people, but by the politicians in state legislatures. Anyone who knows American history knows these things and knows that the Founding Fathers did not want the people to have unconstrained control over the country.<br />
<br />
ASIDE:<br />
<br />
On a mostly unrelated note, Bachmann also drew huge applause with a little quip that she had, "...introduced the light bulb freedom of choice act!" I can't understand the fixation of the movement right on these types of issues. They apparently don't consider it a violation of our rights and freedoms for the government to impose warrantless wiretaps, rendition, etc. But they consider it a huge infringement if they can't buy incandescent light bulbs? Of course, the real issue isn't that they hate CFLs. The real issue is that they know that phasing out incandescents (a policy introduced by the Bush administration, by the way) is about reducing energy usage and dealing with climate change. The Tea Party crowd firmly believes that climate change is a hoax and that any action taken to correct it, even if it imposes no burden on them, is a priori a bad idea and an infringement upon their liberties.PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-10095029246186693922011-03-22T23:09:00.000-04:002011-03-22T23:09:10.299-04:00Certifiable ConservatismWhen I think that my blood pressure is too low, I head over to The Fox Nation in an act of self-flagellation. This evening, I was rewarded with the type of insane, paranoid delusions that I usually think are reserved for Glenn Beck.<br />
<br />
Over at Jewish World Review, Frank Gaffney <a href="http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/gaffney032211.php3">completely loses his fucking shit</a>.<br />
<br />
This column consists of Gaffney going off on a dark, surreal fantasy in which President Obama, advised by his "anti-Israel troika of female advisers" (Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, UN Ambassador Susan Rice and National Security Council member Samantha Power) uses the precedent set by our intervention in Libya to declare war on Israel.<br />
<br />
This is certifiably loony. The United States has spent the last several decades vetoing every UN resolution that had anything to do with Israel. We provide them with enormous amounts of military, financial, logistical and diplomatic support. Our leaders have to make a clear show of constantly expressing how willing they are to intervene on Israel's behalf.<br />
<br />
And yet now we're going to invade them to defend the Palestinians at the behest of the Arab League.<br />
<br />
It shows something creepy and dangerous about the mentality of the ultra right wing in American politics. The conspiratorial, apocalyptic fantasies that they dream up are absolutely beyond comprehension.PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-66316148376161397222011-03-22T22:10:00.001-04:002011-03-22T22:11:04.659-04:00Greg Sargent Tells Us Everything We Need To Know About Mitt Romney<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px;"><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/mitt-romney-blasts-obama-for-being-nuanced/2011/03/03/ABVC2bDB_blog.html">Take it away Greg:</a></span></span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px;">"Call it the Dingbat Doctrine: If you think the world is a complicated place; if you think that navigating the most powerful military in human history through treacherous and ever-shifting geopolitical cross-currents involves difficult moral choices; if you think America can gain </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px;"><i>anything at all</i></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px;"> </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px;">by recognizing that we have common interests with other nations; well, then you’re too weak to be president."</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px;">Greg also <a href="http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2011_03/028569.php">directed everyone to Steve Benen</a> at Washington Monthly:</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px;">"</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px;">Obama is “nuanced”? Yes, but can someone explain why that’s a bad thing? It’s a complex, “turbulent,” and ever-changing world. Having a chief executive who appreciates and is aware of “nuance” strikes me as positive."</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px;">These criticisms came in response to this little <a href="http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2011/03/romney-supports-military-action-in-libya-criticizes-president-for-decision-making.html">gem from Mitt Romney</a>:</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px; line-height: 18px;"><br />
</span><br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small; line-height: 18px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: arial; font-size: 14px;">“I believe that it flows from his fundamental disbelief in American exceptionalism. In the President’s world, all nations have ‘common interests,’ the lines between good and evil are blurred, America’s history merits apology. And without a compass to guide him in our increasingly turbulent world, he’s tentative, indecisive, timid and nuanced.”</span></span></span>PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-4599985035064838892011-03-22T21:57:00.000-04:002011-03-22T21:57:43.871-04:00Barack Obama: Imperial PresidentGlenn Greenwald <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/03/18/libya/index.html">provides a perfect takedown</a> of the Obama Administration over its decision to engage in combat operation in Libya without the approval of Congress. In the process, he also attacks both Democrats and Republicans for having identical positions on the unilateral ability of the President to essentially start wars with consulting Congress despite the Constitution's clear delegation of war-making authority to Congress. That position of course, is that it is totally unacceptable and unconstitutional for a president of the opposite party to unilaterally start wars, but it is totally within the authority of a president from their own party.<br />
<br />
This is yet one more manifestation of Barack Obama's complete agreement with many of the national security policies of George W. Bush. When it comes to <a href="http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0608/Obama_backs_FISA_compromise.html">supporting portions of FISA</a>, <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/146173-obama-signs-patriot-act-extension-into-law">extending the Patriot Act</a>, and now engaging in military strikes without consulting Congress, Barack Obama obviously has the same conception of the imperial presidency that has been universal to almost every president since World War Two.<br />
<br />
I find this incredibly unsurprising. The history of US foreign and national security policy is so remarkably consistent no matter which party is in control that it is difficult to imagine the president acting in any other way. However, I do have some pity for Obama voters who believed that we were going to get a serious break from the heavy handed views on national security policy that we endured during the aughts.PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-57110415098036210412011-03-22T21:28:00.000-04:002011-03-22T21:28:51.363-04:00Wisconsin Comes to the CommonwealthI exaggerate slightly, but <a href="http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/03/shippensburg_students_professo.html">students and professors at Shippensburg were out protestin</a>g the higher education cuts in Gov. Corbett's budget. I would not be surprised if this spreads to other universities and to at least some K-12 schools. I don't foresee Pennsylvania experiencing the mass protests seen in Wisconsin, at least not until Corbett decides that he wants to try permanently crippling unions too.PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-68175702112612636352011-03-22T21:18:00.000-04:002011-03-22T21:18:54.929-04:00Reality TV: Scourge of MankindCracked.com points to some studies which prove what we've all suspected all along: <a href="http://www.cracked.com/article_19101_6-studies-that-prove-reality-tv-causing-apocalypse.html">reality TV ruins everything</a>.<br />
<br />
In other news, dog bites man.PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-64641366230561247162011-03-22T20:41:00.001-04:002011-03-22T20:41:40.389-04:00Yes, Conservation is a Good ThingDavid Roberts at Grist <a href="http://www.grist.org/article/2011-03-22-bingaman-tells-the-truth-about-gas-prices">goes after Democrats</a> for being too cowardly to state publicly that they have the correct policy for dealing with high gas prices. He points to the following chart and notes that part of what changed in 2007 was the passage of new conservation and efficiency standards. He also points out that the savings between the original projections and the actual trend is larger than America's proven oil reserves.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><img height="300" src="http://energy.senate.gov/public/_files/OilPricesChart4.jpg" style="-webkit-user-select: none;" width="400" /></div><br />
In an update to the article, he points out that the spike in oil prices, the financial crisis and the recession were also largely responsible for the drop in oil consumption. Those are major factors that could potentially be more responsible than the referenced legislation.<br />
<br />
Nevertheless, it is impossible to ignore that conservation and efficiency are almost always the cheapest and most cost effective to deal with any energy issue. Unfortunately, Democrats are often too afraid to tell the public that such policies work.PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-11180897553567727682011-03-22T20:07:00.002-04:002011-03-22T23:09:39.054-04:00Grover Norquist: Deficit Hypocrite (Updated)Bruce Bartlett points to <a href="http://thehill.com/homenews/news/150921-gop-leaders-promise-conservatives-to-block-deficit-package-that-raises-taxes">an article</a> in <i>The Hill</i> and <a href="http://capitalgainsandgames.com/blog/bruce-bartlett/2185/grover-norquist-vetoes-both-deficit-reduction-and-tax-reform?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+CapitalGainsAndGames+%28Capital+Gains+and+Games+-+Wall+Street%2C+Washington%2C+and+Everything+in+Between%29">makes his own point</a> about Grover Norquist's demands of the Congressional GOP. Apparently, John Boehner and Mitch McConnell have both pledged to Norquist and his nonsensical organization, Americans for Tax Reform, that they will not agree to any legislation that increases any taxes. This shows two things very clearly. First, no matter what they may say now or at any point in the future, the GOP absolutely, positively does not care about and cannot be trusted deal with our budget deficit. Second, the Republicans are absolutely negotiating in bad faith and have no intention of compromising with the Democrats at all.<br />
<br />
I really had hoped that tax reform could be done on a bipartisan basis in the near future. Revenue neutral reform that eliminated many of the corporate and individual tax breaks, deductions, etc. while lowering the headline tax rates would be a great policy move. It would make paying and filing taxes easier; it would make our economy much more efficient; and it would reduce the number of people like accountants and attorneys that have made a living off of the tax code. Such a policy would have given both liberals and conservatives a number of things that they want. Liberals would have gotten an end to corporate tax breaks for companies like Exxon. Conservatives would get lower rates and a smaller IRS.<br />
<br />
But the demands from Americans for Tax Reform don't just stipulate that legislators should vote against any net increase in tax revenue. It demands that they not vote for any tax increases. Full stop. And, typical of GOP thinking, the elimination of any existing tax break or credit is considered a tax increase. Therefore, any Republican who signed on, including the GOP leaders in both houses, is absolutely lying if they suggest they want to work on tax reform or compromise with Democrats.<br />
<br />
The Hill's article makes an interesting reference to something Mitch McConnell said while on MSNBC. He apparently mentioned that given the people's message in the last election, there will be no tax increases. I have trouble not laughing at McConnell making a statement like that after the people did not make him the Senate Majority Leader.<br />
<br />
UPDATE:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/2011/03/conservatives-must-lead-on-the-deficit/">Matt Yglesias agrees with me</a>. There is no point in hoping for bipartisan solutions when one party is coming to the table in bad faith and with no intention of actually compromising.PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-42113711297494160852011-03-17T19:30:00.000-04:002011-03-17T19:30:11.792-04:00America Needs Nuclear PowerI generally agree with Bob Cesca, but I really disagree with <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-cesca/the-obama-administration_b_836913.html">his most recent article</a> on the Huffington Post. He argues that relying on fossil fuels and nuclear energy is the way of the past and that the real path forward for America should be to a new, totally clean and renewable energy paradigm.<br />
<br />
In the long run, I think it is possible to think of an America that receives all or almost all of its energy from a combination of biomass, solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, wave and tidal power. But over the course of the next several decades, that just isn't possible.<br />
<br />
Even with the best energy storage systems and a really well designed and well managed electric grid, intermittent renewable resources can't provide all of the energy we need. The wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't always shine. With good technology and a wide enough geographical dispersion of interconnected generation resources, you can mitigate a lot of that variability in order to keep the grid stable. But it's impossible for me to imagine any time in the next 15-20 years when that is an achievable goal. We should certainly strive for it, but nobody should be holding his or her breath.<br />
<br />
So where does that leave us? It leaves us still requiring significant base load resources, which is to say large plants that operate at a high capacity with consistent output for long periods of time. What does that mean? It means hydro, biomass, oil, coal, gas or nuclear. Hydro power and biomass are important parts of our energy supply mix and should be expanded. But they still aren't enough to get us over the hump. In other words, if we want to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and the corresponding greenhouse gas emissions, nuclear has to remain in the mix. Full stop.<br />
<br />
We obviously have to do everything imaginable to make nuclear as safe as it can be. That means tight regulations and extremely well-trained staff, both of which we mostly have already. Additionally, we need to find a viable long term solution for storing nuclear waste. If we can get over the parochial NIMBYism of a lot of people, that can be relatively easily resolved. Unless we want to continue burning massive amounts of fossil fuels to supply our energy, nukes should be here to stay.PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-68633416683080141712011-03-16T22:54:00.000-04:002011-03-16T22:54:59.316-04:00Slow Motion Train WrecksI've already noted that Governor Corbett's new budget makes enormous cuts to education. Now, it turns out that those cuts are going to <a href="http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/03/state_budget_cuts_to_students.html">fall disproportionately on poorer school districts as compared to wealthier districts</a>.<div><br />
</div><div>I have a really hard time understanding how state and national politicians can justify these types of cuts, even to themselves. I have to assume that part of the appeal is that the real negative consequences of education cuts won't be felt for a long, long time. Of course there are immediate negative consequences. There are teacher layoffs. Class sizes go up. Some programs, advanced placement classes, etc. will have to be eliminated. All of this immediately visible damage is bad. Where we'll really feel the pain, however, is many years down the line when we're attempting to support an increasingly elderly population with a smaller workforce that is less skilled and less prepared.</div><div><br />
</div><div>In a way, this is the root of almost all of our problems at both the state and federal levels. Pain delayed is pain denied. For example, look at the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/22/science/22dam.html?hpw">state of many of our nations dams</a>. If the government pulls back on infrastructure spending, the fiscal savings are immediate, but the damage is not. The consequences of those spending cuts won't be felt for many years until one of our decrepit dams fails. Politicians from both parties are equally guilty of this sort of IBG, YBG (I'll Be Gone, You'll Be Gone) thinking.</div><div><br />
</div><div>So Governor Corbett will trumpet his sacrifice to the gods of fiscal responsibility. Meanwhile, the next generation of workers, innovators, business owners, etc. will be receiving a poorer education and fewer skills for the future. To make the situation even more egregious, it will be the already disadvantaged students and districts that absorb the brunt of the cuts.</div>PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-41776243430097639102011-03-15T22:15:00.000-04:002011-03-15T22:15:54.085-04:00Democrats Behaving BadlySen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri has had an ethics violation filed against her, <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/51334.html">Politico reports</a>. As with all such cases, I presume that she is guilty and I hope some official action is taken. I'm sure that won't be the case. Even in terms of really minor league ethics violations, this one isn't a big deal. She returned $88,000 of taxpayer money to the Treasury. The money had been used for reimbursements for flights on a private jet partially owned by her and her husband. One of those flights, worth $1,220.44, was for a completely political trip, which violates ethics rules.<br />
<br />
While this incident is totally de minimis in the grand scheme of the orgy of corruption that is the United States Congress, it still warrants concern. It is a symptom of the arrogance and sense of entitlement that is completely endemic in America's political class.PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6945212300219323817.post-52342120285838857752011-03-15T22:04:00.000-04:002011-03-15T22:04:26.209-04:00Just Like Goebbels...The chief oil and gas geologist for Pennsylvania's Department of Conservation and Natural Resources suggested, when asked by an audience member at a speaking engagement with insurance company officials, that Josh Fox's Gasland was, <a href="http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/03/pennsylvania_official_likens_d.html">"...a beautiful piece of propaganda."</a><br />
<br />
Charming.PBShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06863284720093020469noreply@blogger.com0