But there we are, oddities happen at times in an infinite universe:
Sir Vince Cable’s defence of Royal Mail privatisation could be minuted, perhaps uncharitably, as “It’s a dog, that’s why we sold it”.
He’s right, of course, however politically unsuitable it is to tell the truth to people. As he notes, the share price is now half what the government sold at, which is pretty solid vindication. Remember, too, that he and the coalition government were pilloried for selling it off too cheaply after an initial spike in the share price. A few years on, theirs looks like an eminently sensible decision.
After all, those who manage the nation’s assets should at least try to take the profits and dump the losses.
So, I do stuff at Seeking Alpha. That website not working at present. The message, when asked why, being:
You’ll be hearing from the Contributors team within a few days.
That’s not good, is it?
It’s one thing to have a change in what can be written, where, for how much. It’s another to lose a couple of month’s already earned income….
A new gig, might work out:
Apparently Travis Kalanick, serial entrepreneur and Uber co-founder, is investing heavily in “dark kitchens” along with some vast numbers of people. The point here being not that his or anyone elses’ investment is going to be successful but that the general move toward dark kitchens is both logical and inevitable. After all, what is it Domino’s has been doing all these decades?
The idea of dark kitchens is an extension of the various food delivery services. Just Eat, Uber Eats, Deliveroo, every urban centre the world around is now packed with companies offering to pick up and deliver from the local restaurant scene. It is beginning to click that the traditional front end of the restaurant is the portion of the system that isn’t necessary nor profoundly profitable.
Think through the economics of that trade.
The Joint Economic Committee:
When Barack Obama became president, the economy was experiencing what former Federal
Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke called “the worst financial crisis in global history, including the
Footnote 2 leading to me at Forbes. Whoop, eh, Whoop!
Of course, they entirely ignore what I said but then, you know, politicians and economics.
A new start up opiniony place sorta thing. Good folks running it. You should read the site often:
It seems a fair and reasonable contention that if we are ruled by the ignorant then we are going to be ruled badly. An acquaintance with reality would seem to be a useful attribute for anyone making the rules by which others must live.
This is not a left or right issue, since surely even the most determined planner would agree that the whole system works better when the brightest and best-informed people are those doing the planning.
The question then becomes: do we end up with the best informed as our rulers? The answer, unfortunately, is we do not. The planning delusion, therefore, moves on from the socialist calculation problem to something that simply does not work under any circumstances.
Since we find ourselves subject to rule at the hands of the ignorant, our rulers should be allowed as little control as possible over what we may do. Laissez-faire is justified not on moral or efficiency grounds but through the lack of knowledge of the planners.
A piece in The Times tomorrow, plus a letter in The Guardian. If the second publishes as actually written they’re being rather good sports to be honest.
This really isn’t new at all. Way back in 1987, Biden’s first run for the nomination derailed when he plagiarized a speech by British politician Neil Kinnock. Stealing bits of a speech from someone who got steamrollered by Maggie Thatcher might not be all that much of an error to be honest, she tended to have that effect upon opposition. But from someone who then went on to lose to John Major?
I do think that people are being more than a little unfair to Biden at present. It really isn’t true that he’s too old and losing it. Joe’s problem is he never did have it in the first place.
What is Modern Monetary Theory?
Testing my ability to write such guides and some tools to aid in search engine placement. Just part of the market economy, constant experimentation…
Sure, and I occasionally get to write for the Times. And they’ve even, once or twice, rung up for a bit of advice – rare earths I recall one time. But this is the first time I know of that a piece elsewhere has been used by them as a source – a proof perhaps – for a contention being made by someone else.
The state should leave obese people alone as their early deaths would save the NHS money in the long run, the BBC presenter Michael Buerk has said.
He said overweight people should be allowed to indulge if they wished, and that they were “weak, not ill”.
Well, quite so. The end of the piece?
Tim Worstall, of the Adam Smith Institute, has called warnings that obesity poses an NHS funding crisis “nonsense on stilts”. He wrote: “When you add in the costs of the state pensions that those who die young don’t get, smoking and gorging save the government vast sums of money. Having us all slim . . . would cost the NHS very much more money than the current level of topers, smokers and lardbuckets does.”
From 11 minutes in. They don’t give yu a lot of time on that program….
There is always moaning about the functioning of a market economy. The latest fuss comes from Which?, concerning the operation of the energy market. The complaint is that companies arrive, charge unsustainably low prices, go bust and customers — 283,000 households this year — get transferred to companies that charge more. That last being what keeps the lights on, as they don’t go bust.
This isn’t a problem, nor something to be regulated away. Which? seems not to realise that suppliers going bankrupt isn’t an error of the system, it’s the designed function of a market economy.
Sadly, the editor changed my use of “mither” to moaning in that first sentence.
Pity, I like the world mither…..