Search This Blog
Friday, December 14, 2012
Freedom from Unions
Sent to Boston Globe
Wednesday, December 12, 2012
Money Laundering
It may be that there were good reasons to not charge the Bank for criminal activity because it might cause the Bank to fail -- withdrawals by depositors, sell-off by shareholders. I can not see a similar argument for not bringing criminal charges against the top executives of the company.
They were in charge. They were receiving top dollar for the oversight of the banks myriad activities. It is no defense that they were ignorant of what was going on. They should have known. The Buck Stops at the Top.
We cannot be indifferent to the drug related murders in Mexico and even on our own streets. Their money laundering facilitated the operation of the drug cartels. They should be charged.
Sent to New York Times
Monday, December 10, 2012
Energy Policy
These costs are not reflected in the price of oil and gasoline. Hence the need for some government action to equal the playing field for renewable resources.
His claim that market forces have reduced the level carbon dioxide emissions laughable. He seems not of have noticed that we are in a recession. It is that that has reduced those emissions..
Sent to Boston Globe
Sunday, December 9, 2012
Discovering a Roman Outpost in Tarifa, Spain
Pictures of Morocco and the Roman town
Baelo Claudia was a perfect Roman City in miniature.
Wednesday, December 5, 2012
It therefore seems that the threat of "moving jobs overseas" is a massive bluff. In new plants there will not be a lot of jobs.
Giving tax breaks to big business to encourage them to locate in a given area is a beggar-thy-neighbor proposition. Often, as you note, the jobs soon vanish (The Empty Promise of Tax Incentives, New York Times, December 2nd. 2012: A1, A30-31).
Recently, a number of states have adopted an inter-state compact to bypass the Electoral College so that the President is elected by all the people. We urgently need an inter-state, inter-city, inter-town compact that will disallow these ridiculous handouts to the wealthy top managers of corporations seeking tax breaks.
Where do you think that $4m or $10m or $20m tax rebate will go: right into the pockets of the CEO and top management through their profit related bonuses. Talk about "takers."
It is past time to say "No" to the what former Canadian New Democratic Party leader, David Lewis, called "corporate welfare bums."
Sent to New York Times
Saturday, December 1, 2012
Specialization, not privatisation
It is not necessarily being a corporation that makes it a success; rather it is the laser like focus on one ailment, weak eyes, that provides success.
General Hospitals are not specialized they have to provide healing for a vast number of ailments. Lasik, like the Shouldice Hernia Clinic outside Toronto, focuses on a single issue. Lasik's doctors perform hundreds of similar surgeries so their success rate is excellent; its doctors learn what better techniques and tools might be needed, so they drive innovation.
Diffuse focused hospitals cannot do that. They have to be all things to all comers.
To bring focus into the hospital setting, we might experiment by setting up "focused services" that were stand alone entities with budgetary and clinical independence. We could see if this focus might result in the positive outcomes evident with Lasik.
Sent to Boston Globe
Wednesday, November 28, 2012
Massachusetts Democracy Amendment
This has vanished from their website, so here it is:
Sunday, November 18, 2012
Friday, October 26, 2012
Foreign policy sparring
In the debate last night he once again raised the false accusation
about Mr. Obama's "apology tour" (Sparring Over Foreign Policy, Obama
Goes on the Offense. New York Times, October 23, 2012: A1).
This from a man, who in his last two years as Governor, went around
the country running down Massachusetts; he used to claim that he felt
like ""a cattle rancher at a vegetarian convention."
It sounds to me that he did much worse things than Mr. Obama.
Sent to New York Times
Thursday, October 25, 2012
Romney's Taxes
Mr. Romney pays about 14% of his income in Federal Income Taxes.
His platform contains a plank to reduce Federal Income Taxes by 20%.
If this is enacted, it will means that he will pay Federal Income
taxes at 11.2%.
I always though his paying 15% was unfair; paying 11.2% is obscenely unfair.
Sent to New York Times
Monday, October 22, 2012
Volunteering at the Antiques Roadshow
Here is the original long version.
Anticipation
My wife and I are great fans of Antiques Roadshow. We record the US Roadshow on WGBH every week and we record the British Roadshow that comes from New Hampshire Public Television most Friday evenings. We watch the Roadshow for half an hour each night before we go to bed.
We were therefore delighted to learn that the US Antiques Roadshow would be taping in Boston later this year. We really wanted to go – as did many, many others in the community.
We put our names in the ticket lottery but were unsuccessful
We so much wanted to go that we put our names in to be volunteers at the taping . Alas we were also unsuccessful. We are on the wait-list, so something might yet happen that gets us to the Roadshow
floor.
Our parents also left us a few pieces of antique furniture so we submitted several to be considered for inclusion in the show. Would the pine wash-stand catch an expert's eye, would the Edwardian inlaid
corner cupboard be our piece to star in the show? My wife favors the chances of her parents' desk, with the Victorian hall table as the runner up. My hunch is that the turn of the century Hepplewhite card
table with its green baize top will entrance the people doing the furniture triage; or perhaps the Wellington chest. We both agree that the gaudy inlaid chess table won't stand a chance of being selected.
We still had not heard anything when the taping was just a couple of weeks away.. We figured that we would just have to watch the roadshow on TV from our living room couch and sneer about how much
better our objects were than the ones that made it to the show.
By two weeks before he Roadshow taping, we had given up hope and resigned ourselves to the couch. And then a surprising reprieve: we received an email saying that they were activating many of the
volunteers on the standby list. We had been chosen as volunteers. It took but a second to e-mail back a resounding “Yes!”
Orientation
On June 8th we turned up for the rehearsal at the Boston Convention Center.. What a big barn of a building it is. . We walked a long, long way from the security booth to the event hall. They fed us coffee and cookies and an inspirational speech by Jon Abbott, the General Manager of WGBH.
Then came the instruction phase of the evening. DO NOT under any circumstances help a person with their favorite antique. If you drop it, WGBH will be liable and we can't afford that. Do not forget that
you are the public face of the Roadshow. Be cheerful when you greet people.
Then it was time to get our assignments. There were four work stations. The first was in the innermost sanctum: the set. There was a mad dash of people for that assignment; we were barely out of our seats by the time that had been fully staffed. The second group of volunteers were off-set but in the same room as the set. These volunteers were to guide people to the queues for each specialty appraiser: books, pictures, posters, china, silver and so on. We did not make the cut there either. The third station was post show: to guide people exits. The fourth and final station, to which we were assigned was at the entrance to the Roadshow. We got a sweet assignment, just after the clients had been checked in at the door, we were to hand them a booklet explaining the program for their day at the Roadshow, together with a copy of the Roadshow Magazine. It was a sweet assignment because the materials were set up on a table and behind the table were some chairs. We would be able to catch a sit down when the flow of people was not too heavy.
Others in our group were to check the ticket times to make sure people did not arrive too early, and to manage the lines, each for a different hour, and the triage tables where people were handed slips to direct them to the appropriate expert area (Silver, Porcelain, Pictures, Posters, etc.).
I asked if we could occasionally swap assignments to get a bit of variety in our jobs; as an academic organizational psychologist I had long taught the virtues of job variety for the job holders. I was told, “No Way. We need you to focus on your own job.”
The Day of the Roadshow
Sunday, October 21, 2012
Friday, October 19, 2012
Regulation and Compounding Pharmacies
provides a list of six questions that patients should ask of their
prescribing doctors and the pharmacy that fills the prescription
(Science Times, October 156th.: L1, L6).
The questions range from challenging your doctor as to whether an
ordinary FDA approved drug might be substituted, ask the pharmacist
whether they have experience compounding this kind of drug, be
vigilant about IV drugs, and so on.
Now I am all in favor of "caveat emptor," but this is beyond
ridiculous. It requires patients, who may well be sick, to challenge
and perhaps alienate their health care providers. This is an
unreasonable expectation.
We, the patients are not medical experts, that is why we go for care
to these specialists. In a perfect world we would be able to rely on
the professionalization of providers. However this world is not
perfect so my cry is for increased government regulation and
inspection of the compounding pharmacies.
This will require financial resources to hire regulators, but we will
all benefit from the security; a security which we cannot be expected
to provide for ourselves.
Sent to New York Times
Friday, October 12, 2012
already subject to means testing.
The payout from Social Security is, unlike the contribution, quite progressive. Right now the Social Security formula for computing one's pension depends on Average Lifetime Earnings. Each year's earnings are converted into constant dollars and then a monthly average is calculated. Based on this, Social Security pays you:
** 90% of the first $767.00 of monthly income (lifetime average),
** 32% of income between $767.00 and $4624.00, and
** 15% of income above $4624.00 to the cap of $9175.00 ($110,100.00 per year).
So what additional means testing would be imposed? Would the top two percentages be reduced? Or would Mr. Romney suggest taxing Social Security as regular income? The latter would seem the most sensible to
me as only those with substantial additional income would see a reduction in after-tax income.
The real solution to the solvency of the Social Security Trust Fund would be to raise the cap on Social Security earnings (currently $110,100 per year) so that higher paid individuals contribute more.
Sent to Boston Globe
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
For example, when running for Governor, the then liberal Mitt Romney played at being an ordinary worker for a day. Of course, the The day at work program provides great photo opportunities. But Mitt Romney
would have learned a lot more about the problems facing low paid workers from reading Nickel and Dimed (Barbara Ehrenreich) or When Work Disappears (W. J. Wilson). In these books the complete set of
difficulties of a low paid person’s life are laid out in detail:
* The lack of jobs in the inner city;
* the difficulty of getting transportation to a distant job in time
for the start of a shift;
* the theft of one’s time through unpaid overtime;
* the difficulty of finding affordable accommodation (and that insurmountable barrier of accumulating two month’s rent in advance).
It is this context of life’s difficulties that is so debilitating before one even does a hard day’s work. A context that Mr. Romney could even believe to understand. This is the context faced by the 47% and for many of the 99%.
If he developed an understanding of that context he would not be endorsing Mr. Ryan's budget with its drastic cuts to the social safety net.
Sent to New York Times
Sunday, September 30, 2012
Saturday, September 22, 2012
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Romney Flunks Again.
Why did he not rephrase them?
Because there is no way of elegantly stating contempt for the voters.
Due to his lapses of the last few weeks, the Republicans would be well advised to find another candidate.
There is precedent, in 2002 Mitt Romney shoved aside the Republican candidate for Governor in Massachusetts, Jane Swift. She was not polling well.
The same is true of Mitt Romney. He should stand aside.
Sent to New York Times
Wednesday, September 12, 2012
cuts had any impact on his ability to invest in his company or hire
new employees.
Money reinvested or used to hire people comes from pre-tax income. It
would be included as an expense and would be deducted from income
before the resulting profits were taxed. So the reduction in tax rates
would be irrelevant.
His letter is incorrect. The Globe did us all a disservice by not
requiring careful fact checking before clearing it for publication.
Sent to Boston Globe
Friday, August 24, 2012
Romney's Health Care -- pre-Paul Ryan. Little of substance.
- Block grant health payments to the states
- But there is no explanation of the way in which such grants will be calculated. Will it be on the poverty level, or the morbidity index, or on a per capita basis? Different states will benefit under different formulae. For example:
- New Jersey and Virginia have roughly equal populations. New Jersey is about 9% larger so would receive 9% more in Federal funds if this was the criterion.
- However New Jersey would do slightly better (8%) if crude mortality rates were used as the criterion for the distribution of Federal funds: 821 per 100,000 in New Jersey versus 760 per 100,000 in Virginia
- Finally, the poverty rate in Virginia (9.2%) is over one and a third times that of New Jersey (6.8%). under a poverty rate criterion, Virginia would receive a third more of the Federal health care funds.
- Limit federal standards on insurance (private and Medicaid)
- But he says nothing about which constraints will be lifted and which maintained. Without that detail, it is impossible to make any sensible appraisal of this aspect of the Romney plan.
- Ensure flexibility to help the uninsured, including public-private partnerships, exchanges, and subsidies.
- Sounds a lot like Obamacare to me.
- Ensure flexibility to help the chronically ill, including high risk pools, reinsurance, and risk adjustment
- It is not clear what he means here. Traditionally high risk pools have been very expensive. So, with no mention of subsidy, it is hard to see how the Romney plan deals with the cost of insuring those with pre-existing conditions.
- Offer innovation grants to explore non-litigation alternatives to dispute resolution.
- This is already happening.
- Cap non-economic damages in medical malpractice lawsuits.
- It is not clear that this makes much difference. Some states limit malpractice awards, others do not. When Texas imposed mal-practice caps, there was little change in health care costs
- Empower individuals and small businesses to form purchasing pools
- That is what the Obamacare exchanges do.
- Prevent discrimination against individuals with pre-existing conditions who maintain continuous coverage.
- Yes of course. But how does it get paid for unless there is an individual mandate to purchase health insurance. Romney’s plan makes no mention of this; although, of course, it was the cornerstone of the Massachusetts plan.
- Facilitate IT interoperability.
- Already underway.
- End tax discrimination against the individual purchase of insurance.
- Allow consumers to buy insurance across state lines.
- The problem will be that with different state regulatory regimes; there will be a problem in designing policies that will be acceptable across state lines. This will increase the need for Federal intervention to assure a level playing field across the states.
- Unshackle HSAs by allowing funds to be used for insurance premiums.
- As HSAs are tax deductible, there will be a cost to the Federal government in lowered tax revenues. How will Romney pay for this?
- Promote “co-insurance” products. These insurance plans provide that the insured will cover a set percentage of the covered costs after the deductible has been paid.
- These do not protect the individual who experiences a severe chronic decline in health. The ‘health status” insurance plan suggested by John Cochrane at the University of Chicago might be a better suggestion. These plans come into effect if the individual suffers a medical situation which places him or her in a higher cost policy. The health status plan pays for the increased insurance cost.
- Promote alternatives to “fee for service.”
- Experiments along these lines are already under way. Romney does not specify the kind of alternatives he envisages.
- Encourage “Consumer Reports” type ratings of alternative insurance plans.
- But the real information that consumers need is the effectiveness of various treatments, doctors, and hospitals. Progress is already under way in this area.
Monday, July 30, 2012
Saturday, July 21, 2012
Romney and Israel
strong support. (In Jerusalem, Romney vows strong support. Boston
Globe, July 30, 2012: A1,A8).
This, after all, this is the same Mr. Romney who in the past vowed to
support the rights of gays and lesbians. This is the same Mr. Romney
who allowed a senior foreign policy spokesperson, who happened to be
gay, to be driven from his campaign staff.
If I were the Israelis, I would not put much trust in his assurances.
Sent to Boston Globe
Monday, July 16, 2012
Romney's Job History
I am sure that can be easily cleared up if he reveals which Health Insurance plan he was benefiting from.
Saturday, July 14, 2012
Mortgage Help
uninvolved servicers are responsible for the failure to modify
mortgages with the consequent collapse of the housing market and the
waves of foreclosure that spread across America (Housing's LastChance, New York Times, July 10, 2012: A19).
There is however and easier solution to the problem than eminent
domain: the shared appreciation mortgage.
With a shared appreciation mortgage, a government entity would enter a
contract with the homeowner. The homeowner would pay what he or she
could afford on the mortgage, the government entity would pay the
rest. Depending on their respective contributions over time, the
ownership of the property would be shared by the homeowner and the
government entity. With the shared appreciation mortgage, there is no
need to renegotiate the principal. With this stabilization of the
housing market, there would likely to be a gradual rise in prices.
There are some disadvantages to this scheme: it may be more expensive
than the route of eminent domain. Those, including me, who would like
to punish the banks and the lending agencies would be thwarted as the
mortgage would eventually be paid in full.
Nevertheless there would be major advantages: no need to identify an
eminent domain purchase price for the house, stable neighborhoods,
some continuity in tax revenues to localities, and less familial
stress, and a robust banking system.
Wednesday, July 11, 2012
Monday, July 2, 2012
The cuts passed by the house are of a piece with the Republican Party's attack on science. They just do not want to know the facts. The larger they can make the error bars around our estimates of pollution, child mortality, global warming, national poverty and even housing starts, the better pleased they will be.
Introducing uncertainty in the science, enables them to say as Mitt Romney once said: "do I think the world's getting hotter? yeah, I don't know that but I think that it is. ... I don't know if it's mostly caused by humans. ... What I'm not willing to do is spend trillions of dollars on something I don't know the answer to." (Quoted
in Kristoff's column in the New York Times of June 26, 2012).
Until the country regains its collective wisdom and makes a commitment to honor scientific facts, we are in for troubling times.
Thursday, June 28, 2012
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
Romney, bullying, and gays.
Someone's comment on the piece (as well as repeating the piece).
Sunday, June 24, 2012
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
Monday, April 30, 2012
Thursday, April 19, 2012
Liberty Mutual
Mutual are quite powerless to affect the fate of the Company (Ted
Kelly's pay shocking on several levels, Boston Globe, April 13, 2012).
Several years ago in 2002, with no compensation to policy holders and
owners, the Company adopted a byzantine legal and organizational
structure that seems to have allowed the Board to spend freely with
little or no accountability!
* The lines of insurance are provided by three companies which are
wholly owned subsidiaries of Liberty Mutual Group, Inc..
* Liberty Mutual Group Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of LMHC
Massachusetts Holdings Inc.
* LMHC Massachusetts Holdings, Inc. is, in turn, a wholly owned
subsidiary of Liberty Mutual Holding Company, Inc.
The insurance commissioner allowed the Company to adopt this structure
after the Company threatened to move its headquarters out of state.
This three-tier structure leaves lots of questions unanswered: Was the
structure designed to weaken accountability or, as the company
claimed, improve access to the capital markets? At what level were the
extravagant expenses on a fleet of five airplanes and excessive
executive salaries incurred? At what level were they authorized? At
what level were the benefits received? Finally, how much did these
costs detract from the benefits received by the owners and policy
holders?
I hope the Commissioner will get answers to these questions. We policy
holders don't know where to begin.
Sent to Boston Globe
Sunday, April 1, 2012
Draw Down Oil Reserves
To do this would be sheer madness!
If gas prices were at European levels -- due to high taxation -- there might be a weak case for doing so.
But look at the purpose of the reserve: it is to ensure that the US will have sufficient oil if there is a constriction in overseas supply. If the Straits of Hormuz are closed so that imports from the middle east dry up, then that is the time to release oil from the reserves.
To release oil as a price stabilizer would put us in danger of an oil famine if the Straits were to be closed in the future.
To release oil as a price stabilizer would be to pander to the worst instincts of Americans -- very few of us are willing to make a sacrifice any more. We wouldn't even accept tax hikes to pay for the Iraq war.
This unwillingness will lead to our passing on an impoverished America to our children.
Sent to New York Times
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Responses to Questions the Justices Asked about Obamacare
- Interstate commerce exists when uninsured New Hampshire residents, living the State's motto "Live Free or Die," go to emergency rooms in Massachusetts hospitals.
Memo to Justice Scalia: who asked why people should have to pay for maternal care or pediatric care if they did not intend to use it?
- Everyone in the courtroom received pediatric care; everyone in the courtroom's mother received maternal care.
- Our generation has not been very good at ensuring inter-generational equity. We need to pay forward for the health care of the next generation.
Case closed!
Martin G. Evans
Nancy R. Evans
Sent to Boston Globe
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Death by Order of your President
To attack and kill American citizens is an outrage. Even if these people are giving aid and comfort to our enemies, it is not acceptable to kill them without due, judicial process.
I am very much afraid that Obama's Justice Department has suffered cognitive capture by President Bush's Justice Department. The ideas and values that were inculcated in the Department by that disastrous administration have continued to the present day. The whole idea of checks and balances in the war on terror has been abandoned.
The President and the Attorney General claim that they are making reasoned and fair decisions. There was a time that I would have accepted those assurances. I no longer do so and I certainly do not want successor administrations to have this unfettered power.
It is past time for Congress to put constraints on this power and on the States Secrets privilege which has been used to hide administrative malfeasance behind a security blanket.
Sent to Boston Globe
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Let Romney be Romney
Romney was very successful at the leveraged buyout. He made a lot of money from firms that amassed, at his instigation, a lot of debt, some of which was used to payoff the investors.
The problem, as Republicans see it, is that America has already amassed and is continuing to amass a lot of debt.
The Republicans would like to support a candidate who is skilled at paying down the debt.
Sent to the Economist
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Dialog on Campaign Financing
It is hard to argue that more speech is not better than less speech; yet that is what the Supreme Court decided last year in the case of Arizona Free Enterprise Club's Freedom PAC v Bennett. This disallowed an Arizona law that would have provided public financing to candidates who were competing against heavily self-financed opponents.
The problem with the flood of PAC money is that the volume of speech that it generates drowns out the speech of ordinary people who cannot compete in the advertising market. If there was some method for generating countervailing speech then Mr. Weinstock's competitive elections might well come into being (New York Times, March 6, 2012: A26). At present big money alone talks.
Sent to New York Times
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
Romney
It was however, the exception.
During his candidacy and during his time in office, Romney was characterized by the triumph of style (or photo-op) over substance.
When a candidate he worked for a day as a burger flipper and a fish processor so he could understand what ordinary folk were like. Great photo-ops but little gain in understanding. To gain that, he should have read "Nickled and Dimed" or "When Work Disappears" to understand the struggles that low income people go through day by day in the struggle to get work, to get to work, to get a home, and to get from and to home.
As Governor, he rode for one stop on the Red Line to show how safe the subway was after the London bombings -- again a great photo-op that was marred by his failure to know the exact fare.
Alas, I think the Romney we see in this campaign is the Romney that is. That is surprising given his vaunted analytic and managerial competence.
Saturday, February 18, 2012
A Better Way to Buy Politicians
The question is not how to buy politicians, but who does the buying?
Right now, corporations and their surrogates (Trade Associations, the US Chamber of Commerce) do the buying -- but they do it with our money!
It is the corporate cash flows that we contribute through our purchases of the goods and services they provide that enable the corporations to swamp the political field with money.
We should be able to eliminate the middleman (the Corporation). Individuals should have the right to make contributions to politicians and to political parties. But the favored few, corporate executives and members of Boards of Directors, should not have the right to use a second channel for unlimited contributions.
It is time to amend the constitution so that political contributions can be limited by law.
Sent to New York Times
Monday, January 30, 2012
Romney at Bain Capital
Mitt Romney, Debt, and
what America needs
Martin G. Evans
818 words
It is not difficult to understand the far right wing
Republican's distaste for Mitt Romney. Even though former Vice-President Dick
Cheney told us that deficits id not matter, the right wing has been screaming
for the past three years that deficits did mater.. Their opposition to
previously uncontroversial legislation to the raising of the the US debt
limited was a warning that the party took debt seriously.
How then could they support a man who has made his whole
career in management in the leveraged buyout business? The word “leveraged'
gives the clue to what this business is all about: buying a firm with money belonging
to someone else. Using that debt to improve the operations of the firm and to
acquire additional firms where there might be synergy, paying management fees
and dividends, and depending on the success in these endeavors, either selling
the firm off, or allowing it to fall into bankruptcy where the losers would be
the debt holders, not the instigators of the leveraged buyout.
In either case the instigators did well – either through fees
and the money they received when the company was sold or just through the fees
if the company failed. Romney was a star in this business at Bain Capital. He
could analyze a company's operations and finances, he could clearly see where
there was success and where there was slack. He could negotiate the appropriate
level of debt for company operations and for ensuring that Bain Capital
received its due reward.
What Romney and the leveraged buyout business did was good
for for Bain and its investors. It is less clear whether this activity
benefited the economy as a whole. It is
incredibly difficult to get data on the impact of the leveraged buyout
business. The firms are very secretive. Nevertheless, writing in the New York
Times on January 25th., 2011, Steven Davidoff summarized the limited
research on the impact of private equity and leveraged buyouts on firm
outcomes. The picture is mixed:
•
Private equity firms were equally likely to file
for bankruptcy as similar firms with the same level of debt.
•
But Private equity firms might have had more
debt than necessary to fund their operations in order to pay dividends and fees
to their owners
•
However a second study suggested that the size
of these payments was unrelated to a firm's financial distress
•
Private equity firms were less likely to default
than other firms.
•
Private equity firms shrank payroll by about 6%
but this was little different from what other firms did in similar
circumstances.
•
Private equity firms were good at developing new
lines of business
•
Private equity firms invested more efficiently
because of the new owners access to cheaper capital.
•
The performance of private equity firms was
closely monitored by the new owners
•
Two thirds of private equity firms replaced the
top managers within four years of being bought, suggesting that there was an
opportunity, taken by the new owners,
for better management of the operations.
If these results hold for Bain Capital (and we do not know
whether they do), the conclusion is that in doing well for Bain Capital, Romney
inflicted minimal downside on the economy as a whole; though his activities at
Bain Capital could be devastating for the individual managers and employees who
lost their jobs.
One wonders whether he fought as hard for the survival of the
troubled firms held by Bain Capital as he did when he returned to his former
company, Bain & Company, the consulting firm. He was brought back from Bain
Capital to head up Bain and Company which was in dire distress due to excessive
debt after its earnings fell.
He convinced the partners that they had extracted too much in dividends and
fees out of the company and forced them to pay back a considerable fraction of
what they had extracted which was used to pay down the debt and convince
bankers to give Bain more time to service the debt.
The question is why didn't he exhibit the same behavior when companies owned by
Bain Capital faced similar problems: excessive debt caused by transfers of
funds from the operating companies to Bain Capital?
I can see this wouldn't have been possible for all companies in the portfolio;
but surely it would have been possible for those companies making a product for
which there was demand, where operating costs were low. and where the only
problem was servicing the excessive debt.
Mr. Romney is well known for his inconsistent behavior (aka flip
flops). If he had fought as hard as he did for Bain for the companies owned by
Bain Capital he might have saved jobs,
investor capital, and lenders' capital.
Mitt Romney has made a career of increasing debt. Is he
really the person we can trust to reduce the US debt?
Saturday, January 28, 2012
Dont Mind the Gap
In his op-ed piece, Andrew Kohut ignores the problems that both rich and poor have in countries and other jurisdictions with high inequality (Don't mind the Gap. New York Times, January 27, 2012: A21).
In their book, The Spirit Level, Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett enumerate the problems:
In developed countries, there is a strong negative relationship between inequality and life expectancy; though only a very weak relationship with average wealth. Similar results when we compare inequality and life expectancy across the states in the USA: a strong negative relationship. Again little relationship with the average wealth of the state.
A whole set of other indicators (trust, negative; infant mortality, positive; incarceration rates, positive; well-being, negative).
So inequality matters and it is important to note that it is both rich and poor who suffer from these negative effects. Undoubtedly the poor suffer more.
In the light of the 15% tax rates paid by some of the very rich, we need to thoroughly reform the income tax system to bring back an equitable distribution
Sent to New York Times relevant to Don't Mind the Gap
Friday, January 27, 2012
Kerry's black eyes
That would surely have trumped President Bush's playing of the windsurfing card.
It might even have led to victory.
Sent to Boston Globe