CEPR - Center for Economic and Policy Research

Multimedia

En Español

Em Português

Other Languages

Home Publications Blogs Beat the Press

Beat the Press

 facebook_logo  Subscribe by E-mail  


David Brooks Mendaciously Refuses to Look at Evidence on the Relative Efficiency of Private and Public Sector Health Care Costs Print
Tuesday, 10 May 2011 04:08

David Brooks is very angry that Democrats are relying on the Congressional Budget Office's analysis of the Medicare privatization plan put forward by Representative Paul Ryan and approved by the Republican House. This analysis shows that the Ryan plan would increase the cost of buying Medicare-equivalent policies by $34 trillion over the program's 75-year planning period. This increased cost is almost 7 times the size of the projected Social Security shortfall.

Brooks wants Democrats to ignore the evidence that shifting from a public Medicare program to private insurers will increase costs and instead accept his claims that Ryan's plan will save money. He describes their refusal to follow his faith-based policy as "mendacity."

Interestingly, Brooks discusses the increasing number of prime age men who are not employed without ever once mentioning the criminal justice system. A hugely disproportionate share of non-employed prime age men have spent time in jail or prison. The enormous growth in incarceration rates over the last three decades (the number of prisoners has more than quadrupled since 1980) is almost certainly an important factor in declining employment rates.

 
Robert Samuelson Continues His Reign of Error: Relies on Realtors for Predictions on Housing Prices Print
Monday, 09 May 2011 04:37

Robert Samuelson pulled a Washington Post special, reporting that:

"Young buyers 'will be able to enter the housing market at bargain prices,' argues NAR [National Association of Realtors] economist Lawrence Yun. When home prices again rise, increases will parallel income gains, meaning that the relative burden of housing costs will remain roughly stable, Yun says."

Actually, home price increases do not "parallel income gains." They track the overall rate of inflation, as has been shown with a century of data compiled by Yale University Professor Robert Shiller.

Relying on the NAR for predictions on the housing market is the standard practice at the Washington Post. All through the build up of the housing bubble, its main source on the housing market was then NAR chief economist David Lereah, who was also the author of the 2006 best seller, Why the Real Estate Boom Will Not Bust and How You Can Profit From It.

Read more...

 

 
Those AIG Boys Are At It Again Print
Monday, 09 May 2011 04:27

The NYT tells us that the states are competing with each other and Bermuda to attract shell insurance companies with weak regulation. The deal is that insurers will establish a legal entity in your state, which can then be taxed, if you don't make them hold much in reserve. (AIG is one of the beneficiaries of this type of deal.) 

Haven't we seen this movie before?

 
The Big Debate Over Big Oil's Tax Breaks Print
Monday, 09 May 2011 04:14

The NYT reported on the effort by congressional Democrats to take back $20 billion in tax breaks for the oil industry over the next decade. The article tells readers that this is an effort to reduce the budget deficit. It would have been helpful to point out that this amount comes to less than 0.3 percent of the deficit projected over this period.

These tax breaks are arguably an unwarranted subsidy to hugely profitable oil companies, however it is not plausible that they will have a notable effect on the deficit over the next decade. This fact should have been pointed out to readers, just as reporters should point out that Republican efforts to increase drilling cannot plausibly be expected to have a noticeable impact on gas prices.

 
Gregory Mankiw's Pop Quiz on the Economy Print
Saturday, 07 May 2011 13:08

In his weekly column in the NYT, Gregory Mankiw gave a three question quiz for economists. His questions are:

1) How long will it take for the economy’s wounds to heal?

2) How long will inflation expectations remain anchored?

3) How long will the bond market trust the United States?

Let's start with questions 2 and 3, because these are easier. 

The answer to question number 2 seems obvious -- as long as there is no inflation. Why should people expect inflation when they are not seeing any? There is no evidence of generalized cost pressure in the economy as all indexes of wages are showing the rate of wage growth remaining pretty much constant. Commodity prices did rise, but this was mostly just a return to pre-recession levels, and it is not clear that these prices are even sticking at their higher level. This question is sort of like asking in the middle of a drought in the desert, when will people expect rain? Presumably when they see clouds on the horizon and not until then.

The answer to question 3 largely follows the answer to question 2. After all, the real threat to those holding U.S. government bonds is inflation, not insolvency, unlike the euro zone countries that Mankiw refers to in his piece. The United States can always print more dollars to meet its obligations. Greece cannot do the same with euros.

Read more...

 

 
The Post Bombards Readers With Misinformation About Jobs and the Economy Print
Saturday, 07 May 2011 07:56

The Post once again showed why it is known as "Fox on 15th Street," running an editorial with the subhead, "tackling the specter of structural unemployment," which essentially offers nothing to address the problem.

The piece got off to a bad start early, telling readers:

Read more...

 

 
Will the Washington Post Ever Tell Readers that the Republican Medicare Privatization Plan Would Add $34 Trillion to the Cost of Buying Health Care in Retirement? Print
Saturday, 07 May 2011 07:43

That is what the projections from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) imply. And, just to be clear, this is the additional waste that CBO projects would result from running the program through private insurers. The figure does not include roughly $5 trillion in expenses that would be transferred from the government to insurers.

The $34 trillion figure comes to $110,000 for every man, woman, and child in the country. It is almost 7 times the projected Social Security shortfall. While the Post has devoted endless space (in both its news and opinion sections) hyping the need to fix Social Security, it has never once mentioned this much larger cost to the country projected by CBO. Instead its articles on the Republican Medicare plan have been entirely of the he said/she said variety and discussions of its political prospects.

A serious paper would discuss the substance. The Post's readers don't have more time to look into this issue than its reporters.

 
Laura Tyson, of Morgan Stanley's Board of Directors, Urges Going Slow on China Currency Issue Print
Friday, 06 May 2011 15:06

Laura Tyson, the former chair of President Clinton's Council of Economic Advisers, had a column in the NYT today urging patience in addressing the over-valuation of the dollar relative to the Chinese yuan. The heading of the piece identifies Tyson only by her role as a professor at the Haas School of Business at the University of California at Berkeley and her former position in the Clinton administration.

The NYT's identification did not mention that Ms. Tyson is also currently a member of the board of directors of Morgan Stanley. She received almost $350,000 in compensation for her work in this position last year.

This is relevant to the piece because Morgan Stanley has extensive business dealings in China. It is likely that Morgan Stanley would benefit from having the dollar remain high against the Chinese yuan, since this means that its dollar assets will go further in China. In other words, the position being advocated by Ms. Tyson in this piece happens to coincide with the interests of the company on whose board she sits.

It is entirely possible that Ms. Tyson came to her views on the dollar and yuan without any consideration of its impact on Morgan Stanley. However, the NYT should have informed readers of this potential conflict of interest.

As far as the substance, her argument that there is little link between the value of the dollar against the yuan and the U.S. trade deficit with China is weak. When China raised the value of its currency against the dollar in 2005, many other nations followed suit. This led to a substantial decline in the U.S. trade deficit measured as a share of GDP. (The only relevant measure.) It matters little to workers in the United States whether the improvement in the deficit came in trade with China or other countries.

Also the plea for patience must be seen in a context in which tens of millions of workers are unemployed or underemployed with little hope for any improvement in sight. Deficit hawks in both political parties (including many of Ms. Tyson's former colleagues in the Clinton administration) have closed off the option of further fiscal stimulus. The current political context also seems to offer little hope for more expansionary monetary policy.

Given the options, an improvement in the trade balance seems the best hope for a more rapid increase in employment. It is understandable that those struggling to get by in a downturn that resulted from a combination of Wall Street greed and incompetent economic policy may not be as patient as Ms. Tyson. 

 
Huffington Post Teaches NYT, WAPO, NPR and the Rest How to Report the News Print
Friday, 06 May 2011 12:43

Reporters have full time jobs reporting the news. This means that they are supposed to have the time to learn about the issues on which they are reporting. This is in contrast to their audience who generally have full time jobs doing something else.

This means that reporting both sides of an issue does not mean writing "Joe said the X" and "Jane said not X." It means that reporters are supposed to take a few minutes to find out whether or not X is true, and then share this information with readers.

This issue comes up with regard to Republican plans to "drill here, drill now" in response to the recent run up in gas prices. The Republicans claim that if we just allowed the oil companies to drill everywhere they want, it would get the price of gas back down to an acceptable level. Environmentalists and some Democrats have argued that given the size of the world oil market, any additional drilling can only have a minimal impact on oil prices.

The NYT, WAPO, and NPR have all reported this one as a he said/she said leaving it to their audience to determine who is right. By contrast, the Huffington Post did a bit of homework. They talked to some experts in the field. These experts told their audience that even if we make very generous assumptions about the potential increase in domestic oil production it will take at least 5 years to notably increase output and that it would have minimal impact on gas prices.

This is the way a real news organization deals with issues.

 
How Many Workers Should Lose Their Jobs To Avoid Upsetting the Dainty Financial Markets? Print
Friday, 06 May 2011 07:05

This is the question that readers of a Washington Post article on the administration's efforts to lower the value of the dollar should be asking. The article tells readers that the Obama administration and Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke probably both want a lower dollar to help correct the U.S. trade imbalance and create jobs, but that they can't say so openly for fear of upsetting financial markets.

Since the delay in lowering the dollar to a more sustainable level is causing millions of workers to be unemployed, it would be worth asking how many workers should be forced to suffer unemployment for long, just to keep the financial markets from being troubled. Economists believe that in the long-run financial markets respond to the fundamentals in the economy, so the worst that is likely to result from a bit of concern is a period of excessive volatility in the financial markets. This can lead to some traders losing or gaining large amounts of money; the long-term impact on the economy is likely to be trivial.

It is a very damning statement about the Fed and the administration if, as this article implies, they care so much about financial markets that they are forcing millions of workers to be out of work just to avoid a short period of uncertainty.

 
<< Start < Prev 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 Next > End >>

Page 295 of 392

CEPR.net
Support this blog, donate
Combined Federal Campaign #79613

About Beat the Press

Dean Baker is co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, D.C. He is the author of several books, his latest being The End of Loser Liberalism: Making Markets Progressive. Read more about Dean.

Archives