Category Archives: Media Criticism

SpaceX At The LA Times

There’s a front-page story today. As I noted in a comment there, I found the final sentence interesting:

The rocket has just two successful test launches.

While true, there are other ways to phrase it. They could have left out the “just,” which implies that the number is both low, and bad. There is also an implication that there have been unsuccessful launches. It would have been just as accurate, and more favorable to the company, to write, “The rocket has had two successful launches, with no failures.” They could have even pointed out that the capsule performed successfully on its first and only flight.

Warren Buffett

…and his fiscal innumeracy. But he supports Barack Obama, so that’s OK.

[Update a while later]

Stop coddling Warren Buffett:

The statistic I would like to see is the amount of tax paid relative to consumption. By that measure, it is possible that Buffett’s tax rate was more than 100 percent.

I do not care if he pays very little tax on saving. I would rather he pay zero tax on saving. His taxes are too high, not too low.

That doesn’t fit the narrative.

Give War A Chance

I quit reading Paul Krugman long ago, so I hadn’t realized that he was now advocating a war on space. Does he have an exit strategy?

I’ll let Maguire properly lampoon it, but I would note something that people rarely do about a payroll-tax cut:

My impression of the general economic consensus is that hiring people to dig and re-fill holes, or monitor for space aliens, does not provide any more stimulus than any other cash transfer to a person likely to spend it. Handing out money on street corners, the Bernanke helicopter drop, and payroll tax cuts should all be in play.

If a proposed stimulative shovel-ready project adds social value (e.g., a usefual bridge, or a useful bridge repair), then borrow the money for it; if the project adds nothing, it won’t be more stimulative than a cash transfer. Krugman’s belief in the power of make-work and his preference for that over tax cuts, is motivated by somethig other than standard economic textbook theory.

The payroll-tax reduction that we managed to get out of the Democrats was on the employee side (as is fitting with their insistence on demand-side, rather than supply-side economics). It is extra money in the employees’ pockets, which they presumably spend. But it does nothing to ensure that they have jobs. A cut on the employer side, on the other hand, would make it cheaper to hire people. This sort of encapsulates the economic divide between the two parties.