May 9, 2008 4:31

On CNN this weekend: Your $$$$$ and some nice ties

I'm going to be on CNN's Your $$$$$ this Saturday and Sunday, talking with Ali Velshi about what the next president can really do about your $$$$$. Or your $$$. Or your $$$$. But not your $ or your $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$, because I try to appeal to a middle-class audience.

Ali is, as far as I know, the most prominent Kenya-born broadcast journalist in America. He is also a leading member of CNN's vest mafia, and he had one on when we taped Friday morning. And an excellent tie. My tie was pretty good too. You can gaze upon them both sometime between 1 and 2 p.m. EDT Saturday or between 3 and 4 p.m. Sunday.

May 9, 2008 1:41

Non-coverage of the Time 100 gala

Takeuchi Cullen writes that she didn't go because "besides childcare and wardrobe issues, I had a doctor's appointment I couldn't move."

Poniewozik just told me he didn't go because he doesn't own a tux.

And I didn't go because I was tired, Mrs. CC was about to leave town for a few days, we were gonna have tacos for dinner, and--either this or the tacos is the most important factor--I'm always a bit daunted at the prospect of putting on my tux (I bought it 13 years ago to get married in, and it's a little tight).

I'm writing, of course, about the Time 100 gala last night, which you can read about pretty much everywhere online except on Time's own blogs. Those of us of middling importance at Time (a group to which Lisa, Jim and I apparently all belong) get our invites two days before the event. I guess the idea is to hold out for actual Time 100 honorees and other important folks until the last minute, then fill the remaining seats with staffers.

It seems a reasonable enough approach. But the result is that we have failed to serve you the reader with glamorous photos and unbelievable dinner-table gossip (or even lame photos and lame gossip). So I hereby pledge to either lose 15 pounds or buy a new tux before I get my last-minute invite next May.

May 9, 2008 1:01

On the endogenous nature of economic data (now that's what I call an attention-grabbing headline!)

Nancy Folbre, an economics professor at UMass Amherst, e-mails with a couple good criticisms of my "Don't Ditch the GDP" column:

First, no economist that I know of, either on or off the Sarkozy Commission, has advocated ditching GDP. What's under discussion is the possibility of developing good supplements to it.

Second, the viability of economic accounting measures is not completely determined by the ability of existing data. Once we decide something is important, we can figure out how measure it. Data are (at least partially) endogenous!

The first point is right--it's the non-economists (such as Sarkozy) who speak of actually replacing GDP. And as for the second, well, this is why we need to Save the American Time Use Survey!

May 8, 2008 12:27

Newt Gingrich's bold plan to save the Republican Party by overhauling the Census Bureau

I'm a little late to this (it came out on Tuesday), but I just read Newt Gingrich's "Plea to Republicans: It's Time for Real Change to Avoid Real Disaster." It starts with a cogent analysis of just how bad things look for Republicans in this fall's Congressional elections. "The Republican brand has been so badly damaged that if Republicans try to run an anti-Obama, anti- Reverend Wright, or (if Senator Clinton wins), anti-Clinton campaign, they are simply going to fail," he writes.

Then Gingrich offers up "nine acts of real change" to boost the GOP before November. Now Gingrich, whatever you think of his ideology, personal life, or political tactics, is undeniably one of the great idea men of modern American politics. But maybe he's, uh, tired or something.

Most of the list consists of retreads (declare a summer gas tax holiday! bash unions! bash liberal judges!). And then there are the two original suggestions:

5. Overhaul the census and cut its budget radically. ...
6. Implement a space-based, GPS-style air traffic control system. ...

WTF?!?!?! (As this is a mainstream media blog, I should point out that the F stands for Foolishness. Or maybe Fiddledeedaddle.) I'm not much for predicting elections, and I will definitely be among the first to congratulate Gingrich if census reform and space-based air traffic control put the GOP over the top in November. But somehow or other, I just don't think this is going to do it.

May 8, 2008 8:07

Six things I'm sure of about capital gains taxes

A certain Flip has declared that my post from last week about the Congressional Budget Office and capital gains taxes contained the "Worst Argument of the Day." I'm totally honored, except that I didn't actually make the argument for which he condemns me, which was that the decline in tax revenue from 2000 to 2004 was proof that capital gains tax cuts don't increase revenue. (This would indeed have been a really stupid argument, given that the capital gains tax rate was cut in 2003.) I have argued that the decline in real capital gains tax receipts between the business cycle peak of 2000 and the likely peak of 2007 was perhaps an indication that the tax cut hadn't paid its way. But that was a different blog post (and it wasn't a stupid argument).

I guess I could just declare Flip's post to be a case of the "Worst Reading Comprehension of the Day" and leave it at that. But this capital gains thing keeps nagging at me. There are a few things I feel confident saying about capital gains tax rates and government revenues:

(THE REST AFTER THE BREAK)